quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

ok but has McDonalds broke any law that specificate the standards of coffee cups to be served to the public or the temperature of the beverage? otherwise there is no negligence so no responsibility, if there was a law than no label is necesssary.

Errm... there may not be a law that specifies minimal coffee cup construction standards (although there could be ....) and there may not be a law that specifies the temperature at which hot beverages must be served.

But there is a general, and actionable, duty of care to its customers.

Even the really, really, fucking stupid ones.

I understand that and I agree with MsMJAY not buying coffee at McD anymore for that reason, but the conditin to be considered negligent is that I broke some kind of law imposing me a different behaviour, otherwise I can't be considered negligent, if there is a law than a label is futile and food inspectors should check the temperature of the coffee when checking hygene. What I also don't understand for what kind of legal principle you get more money than the dameges yo had.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

ok but has McDonalds broke any law that specificate the standards of coffee cups to be served to the public or the temperature of the beverage? otherwise there is no negligence so no responsibility, if there was a law than no label is necesssary.

Errm... there may not be a law that specifies minimal coffee cup construction standards (although there could be ....) and there may not be a law that specifies the temperature at which hot beverages must be served.

But there is a general, and actionable, duty of care to its customers.

Even the really, really, fucking stupid ones.

I understand that and I agree with MsMJAY not buying coffee at McD anymore for that reason, but the conditin to be considered negligent is that I broke some kind of law imposing me a different behaviour, otherwise I can't be considered negligent, if there is a law than a label is futile and food inspectors should check the temperature of the coffee when checking hygene. What I also don't understand for what kind of legal principle you get more money than the dameges yo had.

No, you don't understand the legal requirement for negligence. There does not have to be a specific law dictating what is negligent and what is not in the context of beverage service. It would hinge upon what is "reasonable".

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

I understand that and I agree with MsMJAY not buying coffee at McD anymore for that reason, but the conditin to be considered negligent is that I broke some kind of law imposing me a different behaviour, otherwise I can't be considered negligent, if there is a law than a label is futile and food inspectors should check the temperature of the coffee when checking hygene. What I also don't understand for what kind of legal principle you get more money than the dameges yo had.

I often forget we are conversing with people from different countries with different laws. Here if you are found guilty of negligence the plaintiff can get compensatory damages that cover things like medical expenses, time lost from work, pain and suffering, future medical expenses and sometimes loss of consortium (meaning you were unable to take care of your family the way a healthy spouse and parent would).

Along with compensatory damages there can be punitive damages. Those damages are done as a type of punishment to deter the defendant and others from engaging in the same negligent behavior again in the future. McDonalds had paid out small settlement amounts in the past for burn injuries but they thought it was still more profitable to keep the cups and just pay the settlements.

The jury could not force them to change cups but the fear of million dollar lawsuits every time this happened in the future caused McDonalds to change their cups and the temperature of their coffee so they would no longer be found negligent if a customer was burned.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

I come from a different legal system so it's quite difficoult to me getting it before being told. So if I decide to open a business in the USA how do I know what is reasonable if it is not written anywhere?

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

ok but has McDonalds broke any law that specificate the standards of coffee cups to be served to the public or the temperature of the beverage? otherwise there is no negligence so no responsibility, if there was a law than no label is necesssary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: EdBowie

The legal concept of 'reasonableness' has been explained.

quote:

I come from a different legal system so it's quite difficoult to me getting it before being told. So if I decide to open a business in the USA how do I know what is reasonable if it is not written anywhere?

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: EdBowie

The legal concept of 'reasonableness' has been explained.

where?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMJAY

quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

quote:

ORIGINAL: EdBowie

The legal concept of 'reasonableness' has been explained.

where?

It was in the link I gave in post #39