Cafe owners lose battle with council over kitchen sink

OWNERS sought compensation from Lismore council after their cafe was closed for breaching health and safety orders.

The Contented Tummy was closed for nine days last year for failing to comply with health and safety orders issued by Lismore City Council. Picture: AndreyPopov

LISMORE City Council will not be required to pay compensation to a Nimbin cafe after it successfully defended its decision to close the premises while improvements to food health and safety standards were made.

The Contented Tummy in Nimbin was closed for nine days in June 2017 after the owners refused to comply with council food health and safety orders. The matter related to ensuring appropriate sanitation standards were met in the cafe's kitchen.

The owners, Carolyne and Garry Scott-Brydges, who sold the business in September 2017, claimed the prohibition notice was served without proper grounds and sued the council for $30,000.

The couple lodged a claim in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) on August 3 last year.

The tribunal handed down a decision on September 14 this year, finding the council was justified in closing down the cafe after the owners failed to comply with council food health and safety orders.

"We are very pleased with the decision," the council's senior public health officer Cameron Smith said.

"We made a simple request of a business to improve its kitchen area for the health of customers and the owners refused to comply with our order. This unfortunately meant we had no choice but to shut them down."

Mr Smith said the council was always willing to work with businesses to ensure they could keep their doors open while making repairs or improvements. He said forcing a business to close its doors was a last resort.

"It's not something we take any pleasure in but we do take our work seriously - when we see breaches of food health and safety we have a responsibility to the wider community to ensure they are addressed," he said.

"We urge businesses to work with us and address food health and safety concerns in a timely manner to ensure incidents like this do not occur."

At the start of the hearing, the applicant stated that if successful he would be seeking an order for costs, while the respondent said it would follow the normal rule in s 60 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 that each party should bear its own costs.

A telephone hearing between the two parties will determine if court costs are to be awarded.