Ajinomoto Sweeteners v Asda
The long running battle between Ajinomoto and Asda over Asda’s
use of the word ‘nasty’ in relation to aspartame continues.
Ajinomoto is one of the world’s major producers and suppliers of
aspartame, an approved sweetener. In 2008 they took legal action,
bringing a claim of malicious falsehood against Asda, who were
selling own brand health foods using packaging bearing a logo with
the wording ‘no hidden nasties’, together with a legend ‘no
artificial colours or flavours and no aspartame’.
The possible meanings to be ascribed to the wording on the
packaging were considered as a preliminary issue. While the High
Court judge, in 2009, found that a substantial number of consumers
would consider the wording meant that there is a risk that
aspartame is harmful or unhealthy, he also found that there would
also be a substantial number who would believe it meant that these
foods were meant for customers who found aspartame objectionable.
However, on the basis of the ‘single meaning rule’, a legal
practice which applies to defamation cases, he then concluded that
the latter meaning was the only one that could be applied and
therefore referring to aspartame as ‘nasty’ would not amount to a
malicious falsehood.
Ajinomoto appealed against this decision and in the Court of
Appeal judgment handed down at the beginning of June, the High
Court decision was effectively reversed. The Court of Appeal held
that, based on the High Court findings that the interpretation of
the wording by consumers included both damaging and innocuous
meanings, the application of the ‘single meaning rule’ would lead
to injustice in this case and should not be applied to claims of
malicious falsehood.
This is not the end of the matter however. Now that the
preliminary issue as to the meaning of the wording has been
settled, Ajinomoto intends to continue with its malicious falsehood
claim.
