Cadbury bugged by legal action

Marks & Sparks isn't the only company having trouble with salmonella at the moment. Cadbury Schweppes is also back in the food-poisoning firing-line. After last year's £30m contamination scare and the mid-February announcement that Cadbury was recalling thousands of Easter eggs lacking a vital ‘may contain nuts' label, it now emerges that Birmingham City Council's lawyers have got Cadbury firmly in their litigious sights for the salmonella-in-chocolate afffair.

Last Updated: 06 Nov 2012

Yes, you read that right the first time, Birmingham council is preparing to sue one of the city's biggest, oldest and most respected employers. Why? For ‘producing food unfit for human consumption', apparently.

Now, MT would be the first to argue that no company, however large or respectable, should be allowed to get away with ignoring the health and safety of its customers. But let's just rewind a minute here. Contrary to some reports, no evidence of a link between Cadbury's products and any reported case of salmonella was ever made. And the firm was not forced to withdraw the products, it did so voluntarily. Cadbury behaved, as far as MT can see, in an exemplary manner to acknowledge and correct its mistake as quickly as possible. So what on earth is the point of this misguided action? Surely the worst use of council taxpayers' money so far this year.

Let's hope M&S doesn't suffer a simliar fate, after the bug was found in two products: its Piquillo Pepper Topped and Reduced Fat own-brand houmous varieties. Safer to stick to the high-octane full fat variety, apparently.

Find this article useful?

Get more great articles like this in your inbox every lunchtime