OXFORD United director Jim Rosenthal was in court yesterday to sue Heston Blumenthal’s Fat Duck restaurant after the broadcaster and his dinner guests became violently ill.
A District Judge initially ruled against the TV football pundit’s claim at Oxford County Court yesterday, but later agreed to hear further submissions after admitting he failed to address all parts of the argument.
Mr Rosenthal, 62, said: “It’s not a win, it’s not a defeat. At the moment it’s a draw and we have gone into extra time.”
The small claims hearing was told six diners, including boxing promoter Frank Warren and Mr Rosenthal’s wife Chrissy, were poisoned by oysters at the restaurant in Bray, Berkshire, on February 17, 2009.
Jonathan Coad, representing Fat Duck Ltd, admitted the restaurant had caused food poisoning by serving “defective” oysters in an “oyster and passion fruit jelly lavender” as part of the £1,346.63 meal, which was paid for by Mr Rosenthal.
The restaurant, which said it was happy to refund the market value of the oysters but not the full bill, has paid a total of £6,000 in personal-injury damages to four of the group.
Mr Warren and his wife Susan have yet to settle their claim.
Andrew Sheriff, representing Mr Rosenthal, said: “All members of the group were violently ill. Some were ill for several weeks.
“To put in graphic terms, they didn’t keep the meals down and you cannot say that was just because the oysters were the only part for which the claimant is entitled to recompense.”
Mr Coad said the incident was “a catastrophe” which caused “immense sadness” to Mr Blumenthal, but added: “Eating raw oysters is a perilous activity and inevitably at some stage you are going to encounter one that is tainted.”
Ruling against Mr Rosenthal, whose barrister had primarily argued the Fat Duck had “totally failed in its consideration”, District Judge Tim Parker said: “Mr Rosenthal contracted for a meal and the experience of eating at the restaurant and all of these things were provided.”
However, he then admitted he had failed to address a secondary argument that the restaurant had failed under the Sale of Goods Act to provide services to the value paid.
Written submissions from both sides will be entered by next Wednesday, and a final verdict will follow.
Outside court, Mr Rosenthal, a former Magdalen College School pupil, admitted he is not a “foodie”, but was adamant the matter was not about money and should have been resolved at the time. Most restaurateurs would refund the bill as a matter of course.
“I think the whole thing could have been avoided by a different reaction 18 months ago. I’m angry at the way the whole affair was handled.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel