'%20x='0'%20y='0'%20height='100%25'%20width='100%25'%20%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20xlink%3Ahref=''%3E%3C/image%3E%3C/svg%3E)
Just as Subway came up with new sandwiches, a controversy has the sandwich chain in a pickle. A federal judge in California stated that the chain could be sued for claims which are misleading customers into believing that its tuna products are 100% tuna.
The US District Judges said it would be too soon to accept the brand's argument after two people had filed a lawsuit against the chain for partially serving tuna.
What is the Subway tuna controversy about?: The sandwich chain speaks about it on their website
A lawsuit was filed in January 2021 by Californian residents Karena and Nilima in the US Court alleging the popular sandwich chain's tuna was a "mixture of various concoctions." At the same time, the sandwich giant justified the claim by calling the complaint reckless. While the complainants claim that the "100% tuna sandwiches" have a mixture of fish species, animal products, and other ingredients aside from tuna, the sandwich chain claims otherwise.
A spokesperson from the company claimed:
"Subway serves 100% tuna. We are disappointed the Court felt it couldn't dismiss the plaintiffs' reckless and improper lawsuit at this stage. However, we are confident that Subway will prevail when the Court has an opportunity to consider all the evidence.”
Following this statement given by the sandwich chain, Judge Tigar said:
"Although it is possible that Subway's explanations are the correct ones, it is also possible that these allegations refer to ingredients that a reasonable consumer would not reasonably expect to find in a tuna product."
However, the complainants repeatedly amended their case by accusing the chain of unsustainable fishing practices and then, for the second time, saying that the sandwiches and wraps were "bereft" of tuna. They also said that the company has been using ingredients like fish species, chicken, pork, and cattle.
On the other hand, the company responded by claiming that the traces of non-tuna were due to eggs mixed in with mayonnaise or unintentional contact with other meat products at restaurants. They also demanded that the court should reject the case. However, the judges' latest ruling clearly states that the lawsuit will continue.
The lawsuit has also kickstarted a new independent investigation into the ingredients that the sandwiches are made of. This has ignited a new wave on Twitter, where netizens can't help but talk about it and decode the ingredients.
The whole case has got the popular sandwich chain creating a new page on their website which says:
“SUBWAY TUNA IS REAL TUNA. That’s right. The truth is, Subway uses wild-caught skipjack tuna regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A favourite among sub lovers, out tuna is and has always been high-quality, premium and 100% real."
The brand's website page also has a special section for Tuna Fact Check and Tuna Q&A for the customers who are now doubting their claims. However, the case of dubious tuna is not the first time that has landed the sandwich brand in a problematic situation. The chain has been in hot waters over the quality of products in the past too.
