A California jury has awarded $50 million (£38 million) to a delivery driver who suffered severe burns when a Starbucks hot drink spilled on him, marking one of the largest personal injury settlements in recent years. The case draws comparisons to the infamous 1994 McDonald's lawsuit, where a woman initially received nearly $3 million (£2 million) after suffering third-degree burns from a scalding coffee spill.
In both cases, plaintiffs were awarded substantial compensation—not only for medical expenses and lost wages but also for punitive damages meant to punish the companies involved. This raises an important question: could such a payout happen in the UK? Given the stark differences between UK and US legal systems, the outcome would likely be vastly different.
Why Was Starbucks Ordered to Pay $50 Million?
The lawsuit was filed by Michael Garcia, a delivery driver who claimed that Starbucks' negligence led to a drink spill that caused catastrophic burns to his genitals. According to court documents, the lid was not properly secured, and when handed to Garcia at a drive-through, the drink spilled onto his lap, causing severe burns that required skin grafts.
Garcia's complaint stated:
'Defendants [Starbucks] negligently, carelessly and recklessly served Plaintiff hot drinks in a beverage container that was not structurally sound and/or flawed in design.'
His lawsuit further claimed that the Starbucks employee failed to ensure he had a secure grip on the tray before handing it over.
In addition to permanent disfigurement, Garcia's case cited mental anguish, anxiety, loss of enjoyment of life, emotional distress, and physical impairment. As a result, the jury awarded him $50 million (£38 million) to cover his medical expenses, lost wages, emotional distress, and punitive damages.
His case has been widely compared to the 1994 McDonald's coffee lawsuit, where a 79-year-old woman suffered third-degree burns when a cup of McDonald's coffee spilled on her lap. She was initially awarded $2.7 million (£2.08 million) in punitive damages—equivalent to about $5.7 million (£4.3 million) today. However, a judge later reduced the punitive damages to $480,000 (£492,643), leading to a final settlement.
Such high payouts are largely unique to the US due to punitive damages laws and jury-driven verdicts. If Garcia had filed his lawsuit in the UK, his compensation would have been significantly lower.
Would a Similar Lawsuit Succeed in the UK?
A payout of $50 million (£38 million) would be nearly impossible in the UK due to key differences in personal injury law. Unlike US courts, UK law does not allow for large punitive damages—compensation is instead calculated based on financial losses, medical costs, and rehabilitation prospects.
For instance, under UK compensation guidelines, a case similar to Garcia's would likely result in damages between $820 (£650) and $176,000 (£139,210). According to National Accident Helpline, the highest possible payout for severe burn injuries is capped at $317,000 (£250,000)—a fraction of the amount awarded in the US.
Similar Cases in the UK:
- In 2021, a child suffered first and second-degree burns after a hot chocolate spill at a soft play café. His family sued the council and received $6,000 (£4,750) in damages.
- A woman received $5,000 (£4,000) in compensation after a waiter spilled hot tea on her, causing first and second-degree burns.
- A customer burned by a fast-food chain employee spilling hot coffee was awarded $4,700 (£3,750) in damages.
These cases illustrate that even severe burn injuries in the UK result in significantly smaller payouts compared to US settlements.
Why Are US Injury Payouts So Much Higher?
The US legal system allows for punitive damages, which are meant to punish companies for wrongdoing and deter future negligence. In contrast, UK courts focus only on compensatory damages, which means settlements are strictly limited to covering actual financial and medical losses.
Additionally, US juries often award much higher settlements because they are influenced by emotion and public sentiment. In Garcia's case, three jurors even pushed for Starbucks to pay $125 million (£96 million) instead of $50 million (£38 million).
Meanwhile, UK personal injury cases are typically decided by judges, not juries, making payouts more predictable and controlled. The UK also follows Judicial College Guidelines (JCG), which set standard compensation amounts to prevent excessive claims.
Could UK Laws Change to Allow Higher Compensation?
There has been ongoing debate about increasing compensation for personal injury claims in the UK. Some argue that larger payouts would hold corporations more accountable, while others fear an increase in opportunistic lawsuits.
In 2021, the UK government introduced changes to personal injury claims, making it harder for victims to receive legal costs for minor cases. The small claims limit was increased from £1,000 to £5,000, making it more difficult for claimants to recover legal fees. This change has forced many claimants to represent themselves in court, reducing overall payouts.
However, some high-value settlements still occur in extreme cases:
- In 2024, law firm Stewarts secured a £41.7 million settlement for a child with a serious brain injury after being hit by a car. This included £6.5 million in early payments and annual compensation of £455,320 for lifelong care.
- This was the largest personal injury payout in UK history, demonstrating that exceptional cases can still lead to substantial awards.
The Verdict: UK vs US Injury Claims
The $50 million Starbucks payout highlights the vast differences between US and UK personal injury laws. In the US, massive payouts are possible due to punitive damages, jury trials, and a strong litigation culture, which encourages individuals to pursue legal claims, often with attorneys working on a contingency fee basis—getting paid only if they win. This system makes lawsuits, including high-value personal injury claims, far more common. Additionally, because US juries tend to be swayed by emotion, they often award significantly higher sums to claimants, especially in cases involving major corporations.
In contrast, the UK legal system is designed to limit excessive claims by focusing strictly on compensatory damages, which cover only actual financial losses, medical expenses, and rehabilitation costs. Punitive damages are not permitted, and most personal injury cases are decided by judges rather than juries, making settlements far more predictable and controlled. The UK also follows Judicial College Guidelines (JCG), which set strict limits on compensation amounts to prevent excessive or inconsistent payouts.
While there is ongoing debate about whether UK compensation should increase, concerns over a rise in frivolous lawsuits mean that major changes are unlikely. Although there have been exceptions in high-value cases, such as the £41.7 million payout for a child with a severe brain injury, settlements of this magnitude remain rare. For now, cases like Garcia's $50 million Starbucks lawsuit will remain unique to the US legal system.
