Food poisoning: Court orders Marwako to pay over GH₵1m
Further investigation by the FDA into the alleged food poisoning incident revealed contamination of food and drinks consumed by the victims.
- Advertisement -
Marwako Fast-Food Limited has been ordered to pay over GH₵1 million damages over food poisoning claims.
In May 2022, some customers who had patronised Marwako’s East Legon branch complained of discomfort, with some hospitalized for days.
- Advertisement -
After collecting some samples, the Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) shut down the restaurant.
- Advertisement -
Further investigation by the FDA into the alleged food poisoning incident revealed contamination of food and drinks consumed by the victims.
The FDA also established that the levels of sanitation and hygiene in the food preparation areas in all three facilities were poor, leading to the recent judgment.
The plaintiffs in the case, all siblings, are Winifred Tse, Rodger Bismark Tse and Walter Tse.
The plaintiffs have been awarded an amount of GH₵345,000 as general damages and will jointly receive special damages of GH₵25, 215.48.
Also, the court awarded GH₵10,000 against the defendant [Marwako] for the plaintiffs’ legal representation costs and overall litigation expenses.
- Advertisement -
It was the case of the plaintiffs that they experienced food poisoning exhibited through abdominal pains, diarrhoea and vomiting, after consuming the food on May 8, 2022.
Court documents which proved the plaintiff’s claims concluded the food consumed on the said day was contaminated with a heavy microbial load (pathogens).
However, the court said there was no evidence on record regarding the source of the contamination.
“Therefore, the court concludes that the food sold by the defendant’s East Legon branch to 598 customers, including the 1st plaintiff, on that day was contaminated with pathogens,” the court said.
In its defence, Marwako argued that while the food discovered at its East Legon branch exhibited contamination due to a heavy microbial load, the food purchased by the first plaintiff should not be deemed similarly contaminated.
But the court disagreed with Marwako’s stance and found Marwako’s argument “untenable and in blatant and unbridled defiance to logic.”
- Advertisement -
