Editing McLibel case (section)

====High Court====
The case was adjudicated by Mr Justice Rodger Bell.<!-- Negative statement about an apparently still living person absolutely needs a citation - see [[WP:BLP]]: <ref>Bell had never tried or appeared as counsel in a libel case. His practice had been primarily criminal law and professional negligence, and some felt that he was "led" by Richard Rampton. for McDonald's, throughout most of the case.{{citation needed|date=March 2016}}</ref>--> On 19 June 1997, Bell delivered his more than 1,000-page judgment largely in favour of McDonald's, finding the claims that McDonald's was responsible for starvation and deforestation were false and libellous.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/judgmentsfiles/j379/mcdonalds_190697.htm |title=The Court Service – Queens Bench Division – Judgment – McDonald's Corporation & McDonald's Restaurants Limited against Helen Marie Steel & David Morris |publisher=Hmcourts-service.gov.uk |access-date=13 November 2008 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080605062408/http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/judgmentsfiles/j379/mcdonalds_190697.htm |archive-date = 5 June 2008}}</ref> The ruling was summarized by a 45-page paper read in court.<ref>"On 19 June 1997, the judge finally handed down the verdict....It felt like an eternity to most of us sitting there, as Mr Justice Rodger Bell read out his forty-five-page ruling – a summary of the actual verdict, which was over a thousand pages long. Although the judge deemed most of the factsheet's claims too hyperbolic to be acceptable (he was particularly unconvinced by its direct linking of McDonald's to "hunger in the 'Third World'"), he deemed others to be based on pure fact." pp. 389–390 of ''No Logo''.</ref> Steel and Morris were found liable on several points, but the judge also found some of the points in the factsheet were true.<ref name="autogenerated1"/> McDonald's considered this a legal victory, though it was tempered by the judge's endorsement of some of the allegations in the sheet. Specifically, Bell ruled that McDonald's endangered the [[health]] of their workers and customers by "misleading advertising", that they "exploit children", that they were "culpably responsible" in the infliction of unnecessary [[cruelty to animals]], and they were "antipathetic"<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.mcspotlight.org/case/trial/verdict/verdict10_sum.html |title=SUMMARY OF THE JUDGEMENT / Employment practices |access-date=26 May 2013 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180824121253/http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/trial/verdict/verdict10_sum.html |archive-date=24 August 2018}}</ref> to [[Trade union|unionisation]] and paid their workers low wages.<ref>{{cite web |url= https://www.mcspotlight.org/case/trial/verdict/quotes.html |date= 19 June 1997 |title= Judgement Day Verdict – Highlights |publisher = McSpotlight |access-date = 14 July 2006 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190608203254/http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/trial/verdict/quotes.html |archive-date=8 June 2019 }}</ref> Furthermore, although the decision awarded £60,000 to the company, McDonald's legal costs were much greater, and the defendants lacked the funds to pay it. Steel and Morris immediately appealed against the decision.<ref name="BBC payout">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/820786.stm |title=McLibel pair get police payout |website=[[BBC News]] |access-date=12 May 2007 | date=5 July 2000}}</ref>

In 1998 a documentary film was made about the case, also titled [[McLibel (film)|''McLibel'']]. This was updated in 2005 after the verdict of the final appeal.

In September 1998, the pair sued the [[Metropolitan Police]] for disclosing confidential information to investigators hired by McDonald's and received £10,000 and an apology for the disclosure.<ref name="BBC payout" />