Breadcrumbs

Food prosecution register

Local council Environmental Health Officers routinely inspect food businesses for compliance with the Food Act 2001 and Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code, and continuously work with businesses to improve standards.

The use of enforcement options by local councils is proportionate and graduated and dependent upon a wide range of factors including the compliance history of the food business and the level of risk posed to consumers.

Enforcement options

The Act provides a wide range of enforcement options for local councils that vary in severity and consequences, including:

  • warning letters
  • expiation notices
  • prohibition orders
  • prosecution.

Prosecution register

Details of businesses or individuals that have been found guilty by a Court of a breach of the Food Act will remain on the register for a period of two years from the Court decision date. Prosecuted businesses or individuals include:

Updating the register

Please note the person or company prosecuted may no longer be associated with the food premise or business listed as there is often some lapsed time between the offence and the court findings.

Requests for changes to the register can be made by emailing SA Health's Food Safety and Nutrition Branch at healthfood@sa.gov.au.

Any person or company requesting changes to the register will be required to provide evidence to support any changes requested.


Montepellier MP3 Cafe

Name of convicted*: Bing Hao Liang

Address of business: 65 Jetty Road, Brighton, SA 5048

Date of offence: On and around 15 & 19 September 2017, On & around 13 & 17 October 2017

Nature and circumstances of offence: Offence under the Food Act 2001 Section 21 (1)

Fail to comply with the Food Standards Code  Standard 3.2.2:

  • Clause 24(1) - Failure to take all practicable measures to prevent pests entering the food premises and to prevent harbourage of such pests.
  • Clause 21 – Failure to maintain fixtures at the premises
  • Clause 19 – Failure to maintain premises to a standard of cleanliness where there is no accumulation of garbage except in garbage containers, recycled matter except in containers, food wastes, dirt, grease or other visible matter.

Court decision date: 16 April 2018

Court: Magistrates Court of South Australia

Prosecution brought by: CITY OF HOLDFAST BAY

Penalty

  1. Fine: $2,400.00
    Counsel Fee: $3,300.00
    Victim of Crime Levy: $320.00
    Total: $6,020.00
  2. Fine: $2,400.00
    Victim of Crime Levy: $320.00
    Total: $2,720.00

Total Penalty: $8740.00

Comments: Pleaded guilty

^ Back to top


Jam and Sugar (JAS) Bakehouse

Trading name*: Jam and Sugar (JAS) Bakehouse

Name of convicted*: Monipiseth Norodom (1st defendant) and Thi Huong Tran Le

Address of business: Shop 12/168-180 St. Vincent street, Port Adelaide, SA 5015

Date of offence: 8 August 2016 and 14 November 2016

Nature and circumstances of offence: Offence under the Food Act 2001 Section 21 (1) Fail to comply with the Food Standards Code – Standard 3.2.2:

  • Clause 3(1) - Failing to ensure persons undertaking food handling operations had skills in and knowledge of food safety and food hygiene matters commensurate with their work activities
  • Clause 6(1) – Failing to store food in such a way so as to protect it from the likelihood of contamination
  • Clause 8(5) – Failing to store potentially hazardous food under temperature control (2 offence)
  • Clause11- Failing to keep separate and identify food held for disposal(6 offence)
  • Clause 17(1) - Failing to provide an adequate supply of paper towels at a hand washing facility
  • Clause 19(2) – Failing to maintain fixtures and equipment in an appropriate state of cleanliness (5 offence)

Offence under the Food Act 2001 Section 17 (2)

  • Selling unsuitable food (7 offence)

Court decision date: 4 August 2017

Court: Magistrates Court of South Australia

Prosecution brought by: City of Port Adelaide Enfield

Penalty

  1. Fine: $4000.00
    Counsel Fee: $500.00
    Victim of Crime Levy: $3840.00
    Total: $8340
  2. Fine: $10000.00
    Counsel Fee: $500.00
    Victim of Crime Levy: $3840.00
    Total: $14340.00
    Total Penalty: $22360.00

Comments: Pleaded guilty

^ Back to top


Stirling Hotel

Trading name*: Stirling Hotel

Name of convicted*: Stirling Hotel (SA) Pty Ltd

Address of business: 52 Mount Barker Road, Stirling, 5152

Date of offence: 11 March 2015 & 17 June 2015

Nature and circumstances of offence: Office under the Food Act 2001 Section 21 (1) Fail to comply with the Food Standards Code - Standard 3.2.2: 

  • Clause 19 (1) - Unclean premises (2 offences)
  • Clause 6 (1) – Failed to protect food from contamination (2 offences)
  • Clause 7 (1) - Failed to protect equipment from contamination
  • Clause 17 (1) – Failed to provide single use towels
  • Clause 6 (2) – Failed to store potentially hazardous foods under temperature control
  • Clause 14 (2) – Failed to provide a supply of warm running water potable water to hand washing facilities

Court decision date: 11 November 2016

Court: Adelaide Magistrates Court of South Australia

Prosecution brought by: Adelaide Hills Council

Penalty

  1. Fine: $7200.00
    Court Fee: $260.00
    Victim of Crime Levy: $1760.00
    Counsel Fee: 
    Total Penalty:
    Prosecution costs: $3000.00
    Total Penalty: $12220.00

Other/notes: Pleaded guilty

^ Back to top

^ Back to top