Reform label laws, says allergy death coroner
Family of girl, 15, who had fatal reaction to Pret baguette said rules ‘play Russian roulette with lives’
THE coroner of an inquest into the death of a teenage girl killed by an allergy has called on the Government to examine labelling rules, after he found Pret a Manger signs were inadequate.
Natasha Ednan-laperouse was 15 when she collapsed on a British Airways flight from London to Nice on July 17 2016 after eating a baguette, that contained sesame seeds, bought from the Heathrow airport branch of Pret a Manger.
Its packaging bore no allergen advice, which was not required by law because the food was made on-site at the branch and there were general notices posted around the shop.
The coroner’s calls to strengthen the legislation were yesterday backed by Ms Ednan-laperouse’s family, who described current regulation as like “Russian roulette”. The charity Allergy UK also declared that existing rules “do not go far enough”.
Dr Sean Cummings, the coroner, said he would be writing to Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, to urge him to consider whether large businesses should have to set out clearer labelling. Mr Gove said yesterday: “This is a deeply upsetting situation and my heart goes out to the family of Natasha Ednan-laperouse. We are currently reviewing our approach to food labelling to give consumers more information.”
Jon Cruddas, chairman of the Allparty Parliamentary Group for allergy, said the case “highlighted fundamental flaws in our food labelling laws”.
Speaking after the west London inquest, Clive Schlee, the chief executive of Pret A Manger, said he was “deeply sorry” for Natasha’s death, adding: “We cannot begin to comprehend the pain her family have gone through and the grief they continue to feel. We will learn from this. All of us at Pret want meaningful change to come from this tragedy. We will ensure it does.”
The inquest heard how Natasha and her father, Nadim, checked the packaging of the artichoke, olive and tapenade baguette for warning signs of allergens, and the teenager was “reassured” that there were none.
However, Natasha “suffered a catastrophic anaphylactic reaction from which she could not be saved”, said Dr Cummings.
The court heard how Natasha, flying with her father and her best friend, were dropped off at the airport by mother Tanya. They were embarking on what Natasha hoped would be “the best summer ever”.
After stopping in Pret for breakfast, Natasha felt an itchy throat and took Piriton to try to calm the effects of the reaction. The group made their way to the gate and on to the plane, but as the reaction became more serious her father administered an Epipen adrenalin injection to her right thigh. During the flight, the situation got worse and after a second shot of adrenalin, a doctor was requested by staff on the flight.
The flight, which was very close to landing as the emergency got worse, touched down in Nice, where doctors were unable to save Natasha’s life.
The court heard how Pret A Manger partly operates under Section 5 of the Food Information Regulations, where food can have incomplete labelling that has a general description of the product but does not require the identification of allergens in bold lettering on the packet.
The sandwiches were assembled at an adjacent kitchen, so were therefore “pre-packed for direct sale”.
Instead of the ingredients being listed, Pret was required only to put stickers on display units. But the coroner said the 13 sq cm notices, transparent with white lettering, were “inadequate” and “difficult to see”.
However, Pret had passed all the existing legal obligations when inspectors visited the site just months before the incident.
Outside the court, Natasha’s father said: “We believe this inquest has shown that she died because of inadequate food labelling laws. It feels to us that if Pret A Manger was following the law, then the law was playing Russian roulette with our daughter’s life.”