Yet a further twist in the tale of Haddon v Van den Burgh Foods...
Van den Burgh Foods received permission to appeal from the Court of Appeal. Rumour has it (my source has asked to remain unidentified!) that Mummery LJ said, during the leave hearing, that he thought Morison J. came to the right decision in Haddon, but that it was in the public interest for the Court of Appeal to confirm the EAT's decision.
However, following the grant of permission to appeal, Van den Burgh Foods decided not to pursue the appeal. They are now out of time for lodging the Notice of Appeal.
Thus the current position is that the 'range of reasonable responses' test remains good law (viz. Midland Bank v Maddon), until somebody takes the Haddon point to the Court of Appeal.