• Entrepreneurs
• Business information
• Certification
• CAFIA laboratories
• CAFIA opinions
• More information
• Consumers
• How to know the food market
• Results of CAFIA inspections
• Consumer rights
• List of risky sites
• Hoaxes
• Other visitors
• Press Releases
• Internships at CAFIA
• Public contracts

2.7. Legal activities

These activities included a comprehensive ensuring of legal administrative work both in the field of administrative law and in other legal areas.

In 2004, the CAFIA initiated 2047 administrative proceedings in which fines amounting up to 9,445,400 CZK were imposed. Compared to the year 2003, the total amount of fines imposed decreased by 1,583,800 CZK. This drop can be explained by the fact that according to the provision of Article 17 paragraph 17 of the Act on foodstuffs, the supervisory body may refrain from imposing the fine, provided that requirements laid down by the law were satisfied. This legal institute was used for less serious breach of obligation laid down by the Act on foodstuffs, where imposed measure leading to the remedy of unlawful state was carried out.

The majority of fines in administrative proceedings were imposed for infringement of the following legislative provisions (in brackets see the number of cases where the breach of the relevant provision was the cause for imposing the fine):

• Article 11 par. 2 point (b) of Act on foodstuffs (473) – non-compliance with hygiene requirements in the sale of foodstuffs
• Article 11 par. 1 point (d) of Act on foodstuffs (441) – non-observance of separated placement and labelling of foodstuffs with expired best before date
• Article 10 par. 1 point (c) of Act on foodstuffs (378) – placing into circulation of foodstuffs with expired use by date
• Article 11 par. 1 point (c) of Act on foodstuffs (195) – non-observance of temperature during storage
• Article 8 of Act on foodstuffs (194) – labelling of non-packaged foodstuffs
• Article 10 par. 1 point (b) of Act on foodstuffs (189) – placing into circulation of foodstuffs with misleading labelling
• Article 11 par. 2 point (a) of Act on foodstuffs (148) – foodstuffs failing to meet requirements laid down by the law were not discarded
• Article 10 par.1 point (a) of Act on foodstuffs (134) – placing into circulation of foodstuffs other than safe
• Article 11 point (i) item 2 of Act on viticulture and viniculture (120) – non-compliance with quality requirements for wine
• Article 11 point (i) item 4 of Act on viticulture and viniculture (96) – incorrect labelling or non-labelling of wine

In case it was identified that the inspected person breached more legislative provisions at the same time, the fine was imposed summarily for all deficiencies identified. The number of fines imposed is thus lower than the number of identified breached provisions. Within the appellate procedure 62 decisions were disputed in 2004, out of which 50 were confirmed, 2 changed, and 10 decisions were repealed and returned to the relevant inspectorate to a new dispute and decision.