Consumer sues Xu Fu kee Illegal Add court cognizance constitute fraud

Nanfang Daily News (reporter/Ozhiki) domestic well-known confectionery enterprises Xu Fu Kee also have food suspected illegal addition of food additives? Reporter learned yesterday, Shenzhen Futian District Court recently concluded a case, identified Xu Fu kee Mango crisp, sesame crisp Shaqima contains the state regulations may not be in cakes or candy foods added antioxidants, the act has constituted a consumer fraud, must make compensation. Although Hsu Fu Kee argued that the offending substances were brought into the material, not artificially added, the court refused to take the letter on the basis of insufficient evidence. Consumers: Three of food illegally added to the reporter from the sentencing documents learned that August 28 this year, Guangdong a consumer in Shenzhen Carrefour Commercial Co., Ltd. bought three Xu Fu Kee food, one is mango crisp, production date is July 18, 2012; another is sesame crisp shaqima, net content of 35 grams, The production date is July 22, 2012; There is also a fall peanut crisp heart sugar, the production date is January 12, 2012. The consumer said that it was found after the purchase of food, Hsu of the above foods are illegal to add food additives in the HSU of the above-mentioned food product labels, labeling contains food additives TBHQ, BHT. According to the national standard GB2760 relevant provisions, the special butyl hydroquinone ("TBHQ") and Ethoxyquin hydroxy toluene ("BHT") two food additives can not be added to the cake or candy foods, "TBHQ and BHT belong to food additives in the antioxidant, To prevent or delay the oxidation of oil or food components, deterioration, improve food stability of substances. According to the Ministry of Health Wei Shen Shi [2012]2139 Government Information public inform, the above two kinds of food additives can not be added to the cake or confectionery products. "Subsequently, the consumer to Shenzhen Futian court to sue Carrefour, Xu Fu Kee two companies, claiming that" Carrefour sales unqualified products, constitute fraud, "and Sue refers to the production of unqualified food. November 5, the court held a public hearing on the case. Xu Fu kee: raw materials into the "illegal add" allegation, Xu Fuk notes that the company produced food in line with national standards, its products are all qualified after the factory sales. "The use and marking of the products concerning TBHQ and BHT are in full compliance with the relevant national regulations." "Hsu Fu Kee explains, its products contain TBHQ, BHT is legal, including Mango crisp in the TBHQ, BHT and Sesame Crisp Shaki in TBHQ, BHT is the raw material edible oil into, and peanut crisp heart sugar in the TBHQ for peanut raw materials, are not artificially added. The company also provided three copies of the certificate issued by the Dongguan Quality Supervision Bureau, intending to show that the TBHQ and BHT in the products involved were not artificially added but brought into the food raw materials. However, the above consumers believe that "Hsu said the products involved in the TBHQ, BHT as raw materials into" the basis of insufficient. "In accordance with the gb7718-2011 Food Safety national Standard prepackaged Food Labeling rules", direct use of food additives should be in food additivesIn the label, not directly used food additives are not in the food additive items labeled, Xu Fu note the above food packaging labeled TBHQ and BHT, it is direct use of these two food additives. "The consumer also said that even if the TBHQ and BHT, such as Xu Xufu's plea, were not artificially added, the label content does not conform to food and does not comply with the provisions of the Food safety law." Court: Contrary to food safety law reporters yesterday from the Shenzhen Futian court judgment that the Court finally found that Carrefour sales do not meet the provisions of the food, has constituted fraud. And for the products involved in Xu Fu's record, the court found that the Dongguan Quality Supervision Bureau proved insufficient to prove that the product is not directly used TBHQ and BHT, and even if the two food additives for raw materials, not artificially added, also violates the "Food Safety Law" related provisions, "food and food additives and labels, If the contents contained in the specification are inconsistent, they shall not be listed for sale. The court found that TBHQ and BHT were listed in the "Standards for the use of food additives" (gb2760-2011), and that the permitted ranges did not include Chinese pastries and crisp candies. The Ministry of Health Affairs Open Office, "Government Information public notice" also replied that TBHQ is a food additive butyl hydroquinone of the corresponding name, sweets and pastries are not in the use of the food additive. Accordingly, the Court holds that the raw material into the food additives in the label and the state-related documents, Xu Fu recorded in the case of the product label added TBHQ, BHT and the facts do not violate the provisions of the Food Safety law, the consumer must make corresponding compensation.