(NEXSTAR) – In the latest litigation aimed at Subway's ingredients, two people are suing the sandwich maker in California, claiming that the company's tuna is anything but.
"In reality, the Products do not contain tuna nor have any ingredient that constitutes tuna," claim plaintiffs Karen Dhanowa and Nilima Amin in court documents filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Dhanowa and Amin claim they were "tricked" into buying mislabeled food and that an independent lab tested "multiple samples" and determined that "the ingredients were not tuna and not fish," attorney Shalini Dogra told The Washington Post in an email.
Dogra said the lab tests found that Subway tuna is actually "a mixture of various concoctions" that have been blended together to give them the appearance of tuna. He declined to specify what the lab tests purportedly found in the "mixture," however.
Subway didn't immediately respond to a request for comment, but the company states on its website that they "only sell skipjack and yellowfin tuna" that is "sourced from fisheries with non-threatened stock levels."
The lawsuit also accuses Subway of trying to "capitalize on the premium price consumers are willing to pay for tuna," the only seafood item on the menu.
It's not the first time Subway has been the target of a lawsuit over its sandwiches.
Last year a Subway franchisee in Ireland lost a taxation case after the Supreme Court ruled that the sandwich bread had too much sugar to meet the legal definition of bread, which has a zero value-added tax in the country.
In 2017, a U.S. appeals court tossed a lawsuit claiming Subway's "footlong" sandwiches weren't really 12 inches long.
from KRON4 https://ift.tt/36mg5ZI
No comments:
Post a Comment