The prosecution alleged that the defendant disobeyed a public health order requiring him to cease operating a food premises, stop advertising products, and provide specified food-safety and business information.
The court accepted the evidence of public health inspectors and related witnesses, found that the defendant was the sole proprietor operating the business, and rejected his evidence that he was merely assisting his niece.
Applying the due diligence framework for regulatory offences, the court held that the defendant took no reasonable steps to comply with or challenge the order.
The prosecution proved all eight counts beyond a reasonable doubt, and findings of guilt were entered on each count.
