Judge sets damages at $5,000, accepts ingesting delimer solution temporarily unsettled plaintiff
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has found no serious, complicated, or permanent injury to the throat or oral cavity of a plaintiff who drank liquid containing a diluted deliming agent from a coffee cup purchased from McDonald’s.
In MacNeill v. McDonald’s Restaurants of Canada Limited, 2025 ONSC 3780, the plaintiff claimed damages for injuries allegedly suffered due to swallowing liquid from a paper cup with delimer solution, served at the fast food drive-thru on Coldwater Road in Orillia on Oct. 1, 2015.
The plaintiff said ingesting the delimer solution caused the following physical conditions:
She added that the incident caused new psychological conditions to develop or existing psychological issues to worsen.
The plaintiff alleged that she lost past and future income since she could not resume her customer service representative position at a call centre, obtained in May 2015, and could not find another suitable job.
She argued that her pre-existing physical impairments from a 2009 motor vehicle accident complicated her situation and led to limitations preventing her from performing physically demanding work.
The plaintiff sought $100,000–$125,000 in general damages for pain and suffering; $297,742–$344,555 for past loss of income; $1,043,037–$1,101,484 for future loss of income; $80,000–$150,000 for loss of competitive advantage, in the alternative; and $222,432 for future care costs.
As the defendant in this case, McDonald's accepted liability and acknowledged that the plaintiff drank a delimer solution used to clean and de-lime coffee-making machines.
However, McDonald’s argued that the solution was food-safe, had a pH in the same range as lemon juice, and could not have caused the physical injuries that the plaintiff claimed.
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice awarded the plaintiff $5,000 for general damages, plus pre-judgment interest.
The court accepted that tasting something foul in a coffee cup and learning it contained delimer solution from a McDonald’s employee at the drive-thru likely caused the plaintiff an unexpected and unpleasant sensation in her mouth, an upset stomach, nausea, and vomiting or diarrhea to expel the substance from her body.
However, the court ruled that the plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the incident caused physical injuries such as chemical or caustic throat burns, MTD, ongoing pain, a hoarse voice, and difficulties swallowing under the “but for” test.
The court found it possible that acid reflux from excessive vomiting, smoking, and heavy voice usage caused the plaintiff’s MTD.
Regarding psychological injuries, the court acknowledged that the incident temporarily made the plaintiff feel unsettled, uncertain, and anxious, leading her to contact poison control and visit the hospital multiple times.
However, the court held that the plaintiff failed to establish that the incident caused compensable psychological or emotional impairments or conditions.
Next, the court determined that the plaintiff failed to show she was entitled to amounts for past or future income loss, future loss of earning capacity, or future care costs.
First, regarding past income loss, the court saw no basis to conclude that the incident prevented the plaintiff from performing her job tasks.
Second, regarding future income loss, the court said the plaintiff returned to work several weeks after the incident and could have continued working if desired. The court saw no loss of earning capacity or competitive advantage due to the incident.
Third, regarding future care costs, the court deemed any award for future health and medical care and related goods and services wholly unnecessary and unwarranted.
