A class action lawsuit has been started in the United States against Taco Bell. Testing revealed that the meat used in Taco Bell`s tacos comprises of less than 35% real beef.
The law firm:
is suing Taco Bell claiming the restaurant chain is using false advertising when it refers to using "seasoned ground beef" or "seasoned beef" in its products.
Click here for the complete article.
Previously, I had blogged about trials and juries. It’s difficult to find information and stats about Canadian juries. However, yesterday I came across a recent article titled, Initiating Dialogue About Jury Comprehension of Legal Concepts: Can the "Stagnant Pool" Be Revitalized?, published in the 2010 edition of the Queen’s Law Journal.
I do not have permission from the author to reproduce the article. However, I recommend it as a good read.
The Star reported today, ``Coke’s Vitaminwater misleading, says watchdog.``
In the United States Coca-Cola is being sued by a public interest group in regards to the companies claims about it`s product Vitaminwater.
I blogged about it here:
The Star reported:
Vitaminwater has too much sugar to be accurately described as nutritious, Britain’s ad regulator ruled Wednesday, ordering brand owner Coca-Cola to stop running publicity carrying the claim.
The Advertising Standards Authority said Coca-Cola broke ad rules when it described its popular line of flavored water products as “delicious and nutritious” in an ad last summer, explaining that consumers wouldn’t expect a drink marketed as nutritious to have between four and five teaspoons of added sugar.
This is positive news for consumer advocacy groups. It seems an increasing number of food and beverage manufacturers are coming under scrutiny about potential health benefits about their product and marketing on that basis.
Click here for an older blog entry regarding misleading advertising.
The popular dairy manufacturer Dannon recently agreed to yet another settlement. Click here.
Last year, Kelloggs was also in trouble because of their popular cereal brand Coca Krispies wherein, they claimed the cereal helped support a child`s immunity.
In 2009 a United States court permitted a lawsuit against Snapple to proceed. The lawsuit was commenced against Snapple because of misleading and false marketing ads suggesting Snapple was made of ``all natural stuff``. I blogged about this in a post titled, ``Snapple Made from the Best Stuff on Earth?.``
Whether this crack down will cause food and beverage manufacturers to rethink their marketing strategies remains to be seen.
Ottawa is deciding to restrict the use of certain chemicals that are used in children`s toys and other accessories.
The new regulations restrict the use of six compounds known as phthalates in toys and items such as bibs and sippy cups.
Over the last few years, phthalates have come under intense scrutiny as a harmful chemical.
I blogged about phthalates before in the entry titled, Boys exposed to chemicals are more girly study finds.
Call Rehan Khalil a Mississauga lawyer, if you have a legal question.
Slip and fall accidents can happen anywhere at anytime to anyone. They are no laughing matter and can result in serious injuries. In Ontario, the Occupiers Liability Act, is the primary source of law regarding injuries sustained when on the premises of someone else`s property.
Specifically, section 3(1) in lay terms essentially means, that anybody who is an occupier of property has a duty to take reasonable care to see that those people on their property are reasonably safe while on the property.
According to section 3(2), the duty of care is applicable whether the danger is caused by the actual condition of the premises, for example faulty staircase etc. Or, an activity carried on the premises for example, having more people in a room than it can hold.
The key words here are reasonable and care. Lawyers and courts have had to wrestle with the definitions of what is considered reasonable care in the circumstances of slip and falls. For example, if a food item falls in a grocery store and the staff clean it up but fail to clean up one last grape and a patron falls on it, is it reasonable to assume the store did all they could? Is the standard of reasonable care, one of perfection? Or does that standard change when it is an individual versus a business?
Similarly, what if your home is undergoing some minor renovations and your yard is dug up with large holes. You decide to invite friends over warning them about the renovations. At the event alcohol is being consumed in large quantities, as it gets dark it becomes difficult to see the large holes in the yard. One of your guests, who is fairly intoxicated falls in the hole and injures himself. There are many issues at play in this scenario. Should you have invited friends, was it enough to simply warn them? Or should the event have taken place in another room. Is your friend someone who regularly drinks etc.
If you or a loved one has become injured due to a slip and fall call the law office of Rehan Khalil, a Mississauga Personal Injury Lawyer.
Trial with or without a jury?
If a personal injury case does not settle, there is only one option, trial. Trial is complex, time consuming, expensive and most of all a huge risk. For many years, insurance companies and their lawyers continued to opt for jury trials. That means, a jury would decide the end result.
I tried to contact the Ministry of the Attorney General last year to obtain stats on how many civil personal injury cases are before a jury and how many are not. Oddly enough the Ministry informed me that they did not have stats about that particular issue.
A trial before a jury has certain advantages and disadvantages. For example, a jury might be sympathetic to the Plaintiff. In the alternative, a jury might dislike the Plaintiff. One of the most common concerns is whether or not a jury will be able to adequately understand the legal concepts and evidence without becoming confused.
The Lawyers Weekly reported, Dismissing the Jury wherein in the case of Placzek v. Green, [2010] the Judge dismissed the jury. The article reports, ``Justice Rady concluded that the case was of sufficient complexity that it was in the interests of justice that the jury notice be struck.``
The case had to do with a Plaintiff involved in a motor vehicle accident who had various injury complaints related to the accident and other previous accidents. All this resulted in mountains of medical evidence and medical experts.
It can become very confusing for jurors to decide which accident caused which specific injury and it seems the Judge was also of this view when she decided to dismiss the jury.
I doubt this decision will alter the views of the insurance companies and their lawyers into reconsidering whether they want a trial by jury. However, this case will certainly be cited by many lawyers who resisting a trial by jury.
If you need a lawyer, call the law office of Rehan Khalil a Mississauga lawyer.
One of the most common queries I receive from prospective clients is where they were sued in Small Claims Court and didn`t bother to respond.
This can be very serious because often the individuals will only decide to take steps to rectify the matter after a Judge has granted a judgement.
In Small Claims Court, if you are served with a Plaintiff`s Claim and don`t respond within the prescribed time period you could be noted in default and the Plaintiff could move for the entire judgement. That means the Plaintiff will likely receive the complete amount of the relief they are asking for since the Defendant did not respond.
Following that, the Plaintiff is take the appropriate measures to enforce judgement against you.
If you find yourself in this type of situation ensure you seek legal advice immediately. Don`t delay, the longer you do the more problematic the matter can become.
Please note that our office location has changed. You can visit us at:
4299 Village Centre Court, Suite 100, Mississauga, ON, L4Z 1S2
Map of new address: http://mapq.st/fQg1Ju