Genetically modified food

The following abstracts from the under literature have been selected for their special relevance to the preceding article. The abstracts extend the themes and discussions of the main article and act as a guide to further reading.

Each abstract is awarded 0-3 stars for each of four features:

(1) Depth of research

(2) Value in practice

(3) Originality of thinking

(4) Readability for non-specialists.

The full text of any article may be ordered from the Emerald Reviews. Contact Simon Metcalfe, Emerald Reviews, 60/62 Toller Lane, Bradford, UK BDS 9BY. Telephone: [phone]; Fax: [phone]; E-mail: [email protected] quoting the reference number shown at the end of the abstract.

Transgenic torts (legal protection for those suffering escape of bioengineered products)

Waldron, A.J.

The Journal of Business Law (UK), Sep 1999: p 395 (20 pages)

Discusses the legal position of those (such as organic farmers) affected by the escape of genetic material from neighbouring genetically modified crops or organisms (GMOs); and argues that although a regulatory code exists in the UK to supervise the introduction of biotechnology innovations, civil liability in this area is likely to be limited to tort. Outlines the protection offered to purchasers and consumers of genetically modified products by the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (which refers to product liability and negligence in relation to direct supplies); and considers a number of tortious remedies, and their usefulness and limitations, which may be available, including negligence; nuisance; the Environmental Protection Act 1990; the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher - a potentially very useful remedy (according to the author) if a flexible approach is taken to the application of the rule in novel circumstances, as was the case in Crown River v. Kimbolton; trespass; the Animals Act 1971; and the possibility of action against the regulatory authority which authorized the introduction of the GMOs into the environment.

Keywords Legal remedies, Genetic engineering, Tort, Farming, Biotechnology, Liability, Compensation, Negligence, Nuisance, Consumer Protection Act, Environmental Protection Act

Classification(s): Operations and production management - legal matters

Style: Case study

Content Indicators: Research implication:* Practice implication:** Originality:** Readability:** Total number:*******

ISSN: 0021-9460

Reference: 28BA649

Is Monsanto's biotech worth less than a hill of beans? (the debate over genetically modified products)

Stipp, D.

Fortune (Switzerland), 21 Feb 2000 Vol...