The Food Hygiene (Wales) Regulation 2006: A Case Study
Under The Food Hygiene (Wales) Regulation 2006
Not Appropriate
Hygiene Emergency Prohibition Notice/ Order (HEPO) section 8
Although the health risk condition is fulfilled the presence of imminent risk cannot be justified.
Hygiene Prohibition Order (HPO) section 7 Requires the FBO to be convicted under hygiene regulations and only then an order can be served by the court prohibiting a person, process, treatment, equipment and premises. A HPO is not suitable as a more gradual approach to enforcement is required in this instance.
Appropriate course of action
Remedial Action Notice (RAN) regulation 9
Can be served on the Food Business Operator (FBO) for breaching any of the requirements of the hygiene regulations. The notice can prohibit equipment or part of the establishment. The notice can also impose conditions on a process or prohibit or require the rate of operations to be stopped or reduced. The notice is suitable for when immediate action is required to ensure food safety and can achieve compliance in a short time. Any chosen course of action would have to be undertaken and can only be withdrawn by a further written notice. (FSA, 2015)
Hygiene …show more content…
The FBO failed to provide records of suppliers of raw material and ingredients as required by Article 18 Traceability (EC)852/2004 and therefore is unable to identify any person from whom they have been supplied, such actions may hinder any withdrawal or recall process making it an offence under regulation 4(c) The General Food Regulations 2004. A defense of due diligence can be presented by the FBO to the court if he so wishes. The burden of proof would lie with the FBO who would have to consider the several breaches of hygiene regulations and the absence of a hygiene management system before proceeding with a due diligence
Not Appropriate
Hygiene Emergency Prohibition Notice/ Order (HEPO) section 8
Although the health risk condition is fulfilled the presence of imminent risk cannot be justified.
Hygiene Prohibition Order (HPO) section 7 Requires the FBO to be convicted under hygiene regulations and only then an order can be served by the court prohibiting a person, process, treatment, equipment and premises. A HPO is not suitable as a more gradual approach to enforcement is required in this instance.
Appropriate course of action
Remedial Action Notice (RAN) regulation 9
Can be served on the Food Business Operator (FBO) for breaching any of the requirements of the hygiene regulations. The notice can prohibit equipment or part of the establishment. The notice can also impose conditions on a process or prohibit or require the rate of operations to be stopped or reduced. The notice is suitable for when immediate action is required to ensure food safety and can achieve compliance in a short time. Any chosen course of action would have to be undertaken and can only be withdrawn by a further written notice. (FSA, 2015)
Hygiene …show more content…
The FBO failed to provide records of suppliers of raw material and ingredients as required by Article 18 Traceability (EC)852/2004 and therefore is unable to identify any person from whom they have been supplied, such actions may hinder any withdrawal or recall process making it an offence under regulation 4(c) The General Food Regulations 2004. A defense of due diligence can be presented by the FBO to the court if he so wishes. The burden of proof would lie with the FBO who would have to consider the several breaches of hygiene regulations and the absence of a hygiene management system before proceeding with a due diligence