Post #65444

2025-12-15 11:08 UTC

There are food safety standards for a reason. Coffee isn’t supposed to be served at that high of a temperature. McDonald’s intentionally broke the standard by serving coffee hotter than they were legally allowed to. You prefer living in a place that McDonald’s can internationally, and repeatedly violate safety standards with no recourse? That’s a weird flex.

Replies (1)

@sunbeam60@feddit.uk 2025-12-15 12:19

No of course I wouldn’t prefer living in a place where legal safety standards are ignored or non-existent. But that isn’t what I said either, so I refute your false dilemma argument :) I don’t know the details of the lawsuit. I was merely commenting that the description of the case from the post I replied to didn’t make it make more sense. Your post did, though, so thank you for that. For what it’s worth in the UK and Denmark, the two countries I know well enough, the temperature of hot drinks don’t have a legal maximum and any liability would fall under “protecting customers from foreseeable harm” broad health and safety regulations. So the question, at least from a legal perspective is what is foreseeable. Can coffee made with boiling water be foreseen to be scalding? Certainly in the UK, case law suggest exactly that a hot drink should be foreseen to be scalding and therefore it is not negligent to serve it at scalding temperatures; see Bogle v McDonalds (2002) - cms-lawnow.com/…/recent-case-on-the-supply-of-hot…

Open ##65554