The Price of Poor Hygiene in Nice

A bar manager was summoned to appear on Friday, January 6, 2006. The reason: the kitchen of his establishment presented a dubious character during an inspection in May 2004.

Victim of negligence at first, the man wishes to explain himself before the judges. It is nearly 7:30 PM when the hygiene services accompanied by police enter a bar in Nice for a health inspection. – *This is at least what the bar owner tells us, whom we will call Jean-Yves.* To their astonishment, the inspectors discover the kitchen. Mold, filth, …

At this sight, the inspectors decide to photograph the place and the police officers summon Jean-Yves to the police station. Twenty months later, here he is in criminal court to be judged. Somewhat ashamed, Jean-Yves presents himself at the bar early in the morning.

The President of the hearing, Patrick Veron, summarizes the facts he is accused of: Risk of food poisoning, poor kitchen hygiene, spoiled food, storage room attacked by mold… Faced with these accusations, this 65-year-old defendant attempts to defend himself as best he can: “In the storage room, there were only canned goods that were stored. So nothing perishable.”

But without further ado, the President adds a significant element to his story: “There was still beef that had turned black. And what’s more, it had a foul smell. I would like to understand how you managed to reach that point?” With a sorrowful air, Jean-Yves does not deny the faults the court attributes to him. Yet he wishes to explain himself: “At the time of the incident, I was close to retirement. It’s true, I let myself go. I eased off and therefore did not exercise the necessary control. I made a mistake, I’m sorry.”

As sole response, the defendant hears a new charge. This time from the District Attorney: “The establishment gave the impression of having an abandoned kitchen, with repulsive filth and the presence of so-called ‘corrupted’ products in decomposition. The 2004 inspection had the merit of ending this catastrophic situation. Due to this extreme filth, I request against the defendant a fine of 10,000 euros with probation.”

To counter-attack, Jean-Yves’s lawyer cites mitigating circumstances: “First, one must take into account the fact that my client has a clean criminal record. Moreover, he knows he is totally guilty in this matter. He has never even tried to shirk his responsibilities. Regarding his negligence, Jean-Yves deeply regrets it.” But the defense does not stop there. According to the lawyer, the defendant behaved remarkably: “It should be known that a few days after the inspection, Jean-Yves realized the deterioration of the kitchen and had it destroyed.

As proof, he even called in a bailiff to document it. One must admit that this kind of radical and rare behavior is remarkable.” In less than an hour, these passionate debates come to an end. The suspense of waiting for deliberation is then felt. Finally, late in the morning, the President announces the verdict. Jean-Yves is finally sentenced to 10,000 euros in fines, of which 5,000 euros with probation. For Jean-Yves, it’s bad luck: “I never had problems during the other health inspections. It had to happen to me at the end of my career…”