mks

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Media captionNigel Farage was hit with a milkshake while campaigning in Newcastle

A Burger King tweet alerting customers it was "selling milkshakes all weekend" has been banned for condoning and encouraging anti-social behaviour.

The fast food firm's post came after a number of European election candidates had milkshakes thrown at them.

And a McDonald's in Edinburgh stopped selling the drinks before Nigel Farage addressed a rally in the city.

Burger King defended the tweet, calling it a "tongue-in-cheek reaction to recent events".

Ice cream ban near Farage campaign rally

Milkshake thrown at Nigel Farage

It read: "Dear people of Scotland. We're selling milkshakes all weekend. Have fun. Love BK. #justsaying".

The Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) said it considered the tweet "irresponsible".

Image copyrightAdvertising Standards Agency

The post on Burger King's official Twitter account followed a number of dairy-based incidents involving campaigners on the European election trail.

Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, who is known as Tommy Robinson, and UKIP candidate Carl Benjamin were both hit with food and drink during the build-up to the poll.

UKIP candidate in milkshake melee

Milkshake thrown over Tommy Robinson

Former English Defence League leader Mr Yaxley-Lennon was drenched with milkshakes twice in two days as he campaigned in the north-west of England.

Days after his appearance at a Brexit Party rally in Edinburgh, Mr Farage was also later doused with milkshake during a campaign walkabout in Newcastle.

'Tongue-in-cheek'

The ASA was critical of Burger King's tweet for condoning and encouraging anti-social behaviour.

It said 24 people complained that it was irresponsible and offensive because they believed it encouraged violence and anti-social behaviour.

The tweet was posted the day after a McDonald's outlet in Edinburgh put up a sign to say that it would not be selling milkshakes or ice cream by "police request".

Burger King said it did not endorse violence, which it made clear with a follow-up tweet reading: "We'd never endorse violence - or wasting our delicious milkshakes! So enjoy the weekend and please drink responsibly people."

Image copyrightPA Image caption Dairy items were temporarily withdrawn from sale at an Edinburgh McDonald's during Nigel Farage's visit

The ASA said: "Although we acknowledged that the tweet may have been intended as a humorous response to the suspension of milkshake sales by the advertiser's competitor, in the context in which it appeared we considered it would be understood as suggesting that Burger King milkshakes could be used instead by people to 'milkshake' Nigel Farage.

"We considered the ad therefore condoned the previous anti-social behaviour and encouraged further instances. We therefore concluded that the ad was irresponsible."

The ASA added: "We told Burger King to ensure that its future marketing communications did not condone or encourage anti-social behaviour."

A Burger King spokesman said: "Our tweet regarding the situation in Edinburgh was intended to be a tongue-in-cheek reaction to the situation. It appears some have misinterpreted this as an endorsement of violence, which we absolutely reject.

"At Burger King, we totally believe in individuals' right to freedom of expression and would never do anything that conflicts with this. We'd never endorse violence or wasting our delicious milkshakes."

Media playback is unsupported on your device

Media captionCats, shoes, eggs and milkshakes - why people throw things at politicians

A High Court judge has ruled an email sent by a lawyer is legally binding as it includes his automated signature.

The email is part of an exchange between lawyers whose clients were in dispute over the sale of some land.

In his email, the lawyer for the owners set out terms, including a sale price £25,000 lower than the original asking price, which the other lawyer accepted.

But he then said the terms had not been finalised because no paperwork had been officially signed by both parties.

The owners' lawyer, Daniel Tear, argued this fell under Section 2 (1) of the Law of Property Act of 1989, which states: "The document incorporating the terms or, where contracts are exchanged, one of the documents

incorporating them (but not necessarily the same one) must be signed by or on behalf of each party to the contract."

However, the judge said Mr Tear's auto-signature at the bottom of the email - although not added deliberately by him - served as a signature.

"The purported signature of the solicitor on behalf of the defendant was by 'automatic' generation of his name, occupation, role and contact details at the foot of an email," wrote Judge Pearce, at Manchester Civil Justice Centre.

He also pointed out not all of the email correspondence from Mr Tear had included the auto-signature and said his use of the words "many thanks" at the end of the email text showed "an intention to connect the name with the contents of the email".

"I am satisfied that Mr Tear signed the relevant email on behalf of the defendant," Judge Pearce said.

Mr Tear said in his defence this had not been his intention.

BBC News has contacted him for comment.

"Be careful what you add your signature block to," said journalist Gareth Corfield, who covered the story on technology news website The Register.

A High Court judge has ruled an email sent by a lawyer is legally binding as it includes his automated signature.

The email is part of an exchange between lawyers whose clients were in dispute over the sale of some land.

In his email, the lawyer for the owners set out terms, including a sale price £25,000 lower than the original asking price, which the other lawyer accepted.

But he then said the terms had not been finalised because no paperwork had been officially signed by both parties.

The owners' lawyer, Daniel Tear, argued this fell under Section 2 (1) of the Law of Property Act of 1989, which states: "The document incorporating the terms or, where contracts are exchanged, one of the documents

incorporating them (but not necessarily the same one) must be signed by or on behalf of each party to the contract."

However, the judge said Mr Tear's auto-signature at the bottom of the email - although not added deliberately by him - served as a signature.

"The purported signature of the solicitor on behalf of the defendant was by 'automatic' generation of his name, occupation, role and contact details at the foot of an email," wrote Judge Pearce, at Manchester Civil Justice Centre.

He also pointed out not all of the email correspondence from Mr Tear had included the auto-signature and said his use of the words "many thanks" at the end of the email text showed "an intention to connect the name with the contents of the email".

"I am satisfied that Mr Tear signed the relevant email on behalf of the defendant," Judge Pearce said.

Mr Tear said in his defence this had not been his intention.

BBC News has contacted him for comment.

Image copyrightFredrik Christiansen Image caption Southern right whale mother and calf in clear waters off Argentina

How do you weigh the largest animals on the planet?

Until now it has only been possible to weigh whales once they have washed up dead on beaches.

Now scientists have solved the conundrum, with the help of aerial photographs taken by drones.

Their model accurately calculated the body volume and mass of wild southern right whales. Already being used to assess the survival of calves, it has many potential uses in conservation.

Body mass is a key factor in the success of whales as a group, determining their energy uses, food requirements and growth rates.

Yet most of what we know about the body size of whales comes from old whaling literature or from animals that end up stranded on the beach or caught in fishing gear.

"It is very difficult to measure a whale on a scale - I mean you have to kill it to do it and that's exactly what we're avoiding here," said study researcher Fredrik Christiansen from the Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies in Denmark.

The researchers studied southern right whales, which gather in large numbers at their winter breeding grounds off the coast of Argentina.

Image copyrightChristiansen et al Image caption An interactive 3D model of a southern right whale created by the researchers

Click here to see a 3D model of the whale.

They flew a drone over whales swimming in clear water, capturing photographs when the adults and calves came up to the surface to breathe, including their backs and sides when they rolled over.

From these, they were able to obtain length, width and height measurements for 86 individuals.

They found they could get a good representation of the body shape of the whales, which they linked back to old whaling literature recording body length, girth and mass. They were then able to convert body shapes, or volumes, to mass.

"The ability to predict body mass from free-living whales opens up the opportunity for us to look at animals over time and look at how they change, how they grow," said Prof Christiansen.

Image copyrightFredrik Christiansen Image caption Flying drones off the coast of Península Valdés, Argentina

Drone studies could help in conservation by monitoring the health of different whale populations in the oceans.

The approach could also be used to estimate the size of other marine mammals by adjusting the model parameters.

Baleen whales are the largest animals on this planet, ranging from the 3,500kg pygmy right whale to the 190,000kg blue whale.

Their body mass is central to their success as an animal group.

The research was carried out in collaboration with the Southern Right Whale Health Monitoring Programme in Argentina and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in the US.

The work is outlined in the British Ecological Society journal Methods in Ecology and Evolution (MEE).