Food safety & food hygiene solicitors

Food safety - case studies

Food condemnation - novel foods

Our specialist lawyers represented a business who had been issued with numerous Detention Notices and Food Condemnation Warning Notices by their local council for products that they sold online, namely Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMs). The Food Condemnation Warning Notices confirmed that the council intended to make an application to a Justice of the Peace at their local magistrates court for an order that these products should be condemned.

The products had been tested by a public analyst and the council was applying for an order on the basis that the products were “unregistered novel foods” and as such, were in breach of The Novel Food (England) Regulation 2018, which enact and enforce Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 on novel foods.

The purpose of the condemnation hearing was to ensure that these products were removed from the market, thus preventing their sale for human consumption. Our specialist lawyers represented the business at the hearing in order to protect to their interests and liaised with the council to determine their intentions in respect of any further enforcement action.

At the hearing, the court found that the items seized were food supplements and as such, were to be considered and defined as novel foods. The products were therefore condemned and the business was ordered to pay the costs of the destruction and disposal of these products.

Additional products had also been seized and these were in the process of being tested at the time of the hearing. Following the hearing, and in order to avoid a further condemnation hearing in respect of those products, our specialist lawyers liaised with the council to agree an undertaking that these products would be destroyed to prevent them from being used for human consumption, and agreed reasonable costs for the destruction and disposal of all of the products.

Hygiene Emergency Prohibition Order & Prosecution

Our specialist lawyers acted for a takeaway business who had been issued with a Hygiene Emergency Prohibition Order following an inspection at the premises by their local council, which identified concerns in relation to the management and control of pests; maintenance; record keeping; and cleaning procedures. Our client immediately addressed the council’s concerns and were permitted to re-open shortly after.

However, our client was subsequently summonsed to appear at the Magistrates Court in respect of three offences contrary to Regulation 19 of the Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013:

1. Failing to keep food premises clean and maintained in good repair and condition;
2. Failing to ensure that at all stages of production, processing and distribution, food was protected against any contamination likely to render food unfit for human consumption, injurious to health or so contaminated in such a way that it would be unreasonable to expect it to be consumed in that state; and
3. Failing to ensure that adequate procedures were in place to control pests.

Our specialist lawyers were instructed to provide advice and representation to the company in this prosecution. At the hearing, the company pleaded guilty to all three offences.

Our specialist lawyers made successful submissions on behalf of the company to mitigate the financial penalty. The court agreed that the sentence would be imposed on the basis of one of the three offences and not separately for each offence, taking into account the totality principle. The court also accepted our submissions on the approach to be taken, namely to adjust the starting point of the fine downwards to take into account the size of the company; their personal mitigation; and the investment that the company had already made to rectify the issues.

The court therefore reduced the starting point of the fine from £1,200 down to £600. This was further reduced by one third to allow for credit for the company’s early guilty plea. The court ordered that the company pay a financial penalty of £1,357.17, which included a fine of £400 and costs of £957.17.

Prosecution

Our specialist lawyers represented the owner of an Italian restaurant who had received a summons to appear from the Magistrates Court in relation to a number of breaches of the Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013. These breaches had been identified by the local council following several routine visits to the restaurant and a complaint from a member of the public. The restaurant was alleged to have committed 10 separate offences, including in relation to:

1. A failure to put in place, implement and maintain permanent procedures based on HACCP principles;
2. A failure to train, or provide training to staff;
3. A failure to ensure that the kitchen was kept clean and maintained in good repair and condition;
4. A failure to keep fittings and equipment with which food comes into contact, clean, and where necessary, disinfected; and
5. A failure to undertaken any food hygiene training, or provide training for any member of staff.

At the hearing, our client pleaded guilty to seven of the offences and the remaining three offences were dismissed following discussions with the council. Our specialist lawyers thereafter put forward mitigation and made detailed submissions on sentence to the court.

The court ordered that our client pay a total financial penalty of £3,168, which included a fine of £1,575 plus costs of £1,593.