Fraud with water Nestlé Waters fined almost 2 million francs in France

SDA

10.9.2024 - 19:44

Nestlé Waters has to pay a fine of 2 million euros in France. The Nestlé mineral water subsidiary was accused of illegal water drilling and deception.
Nestlé Waters has to pay a fine of 2 million euros in France. The Nestlé mineral water subsidiary was accused of illegal water drilling and deception.
Archivbild: sda

Nestlé Waters has to pay a fine of 2 million euros (around 1.8 million francs) in France. The company has concluded a so-called judicial agreement in the public interest (Convention Judiciaire d'Intérêt Public CJIP) with the public prosecutor's office of the city of Epinal, which has conducted two preliminary investigations.

No time? blue News summarizes for you

  • The mineral water division of the Nestlé Group is paying a fine of two million euros in France for fraud and environmental allegations.
  • The public prosecutor's office of the city of Epinal in the eastern French Vosges announced a corresponding court agreement with Nestlé Waters on Tuesday.
  • The company is accused of illegal water use and deception.

One of the preliminary investigations concerned allegations of illegal water use, as the public prosecutor's office in Epinal announced in a press release on Tuesday. The other preliminary investigation concerned deception: Nestlé's mineral water subsidiary had treated the water with ultraviolet light and activated carbon filters, which is prohibited for mineral water.

Nestlé Waters had also committed itself to remedying the ecological impact through an ambitious plan for renaturation and restoration of the ecological balance, explained public prosecutor Frédéric Nahon. Nestlé's mineral water subsidiary will also pay compensation of 516,800 euros (477,200 Swiss francs) to several nature conservation organizations.

The Epinal public prosecutor's office has now stated that Nestlé Waters has put an end to these violations and has "fully cooperated" with the judicial and administrative authorities. Furthermore, there had been no impact on public health. For this reason, a judicial settlement was proposed in the public interest, the public prosecutor explained.

SDA