‘Distraught’ boss fined over hygiene failings

A “deeply distraught” Birmingham Cantonese restaurant boss who admitted a string of hygiene failings has been fined thousands of pounds.

Chung Yuen Yue, director of Sum Yue Restaurant based in Unit 5 of Tin Tin Food Hall, Masshouse Lane, pleaded guilty to six breaches of the Food Safety and Hygiene (England) Regulations 2013.

At a hearing on Thursday, October 8, Birmingham Magistrates Court was told a routine inspection in August 2025 and a follow-up visit in January this year, uncovered deficiencies with cleanliness.

These included a dirty floor, shelving, the hot water heater, walls, the cooker, pipework, fixtures, articles, containers, grease filters a fridge and a microwave.

In mitigation, the court was told it had long been Yue’s ambition to run his own restaurant and he accepted full responsibility for the failings, adding he has already made changes to improve the situation.

Hannan Aurangzeb, prosecuting for Birmingham City Council, said the defendant had failed to ensure equipment and fittings which came into contact with food were cleaned and disinfected.

He also said the was an absence of food safety management systems in place during both inspections.

Mr Aurangzeb said: “Food safety regulations exist to minimise the risk of illness. Deficiencies were discovered within two separate visits to the premises.”

Jatinder Sokhal, defending, said father-of-one Yue had fully co-operated with the relevant authorities and entered guilty pleas at the first opportunity.

He said: “Mr Yue is a chef and has been a chef for 10 years. He came to the UK approximately four years ago and decided to take a risk and open a restaurant.

“He is in effect a one-man band with a part-time staff member. His wife is an admin assistant and helps with the paperwork.

“He takes full responsibility – it is his restaurant and he is in charge. But he now understands that, in addition to his role as a chef he has to maintain hygiene standards.”

Mr Sokhal added Yue had hired an additional member of staff to help him meet the required standards.

He said: “That has been done to a significant cost to the business and there has been a huge improvement since the last inspection.

“He is deeply distraught at what has happened, he appreciates there will be a significant financial penalty and reputational damage.

“It has been his ambition to have a restaurant but he now understands there are other responsibilities to simply cooking meals.

“What he has said to me is, depending on the amount of fine, may be the difference between closing down and continuing.”

Magistrates fined the company £3,500 and ordered a £1,400 surcharge and to pay costs of £3,477.30.

By Gurdip Thandi | Local Democracy Reporting Service