Lactalis indicted for aggravated deception and unintentional injuries in the investigation into salmonella contaminated milk

The Lactalis group announced in a press release on Thursday, February 16, that it had been indicted with the company Celia Laiterie de Craon for aggravated deception and involuntary injuries in the investigation into salmonella contamination of infant milk which affected dozens of infants at the end of 2017.

Summoned by a judge from the public health department of the Paris court, the two companies were also indicted for non-execution of withdrawal and recall measures, announced the number one French milk company in a press release. They were placed under judicial control with a bond of 300,000 euros each, confirmed a judicial source.

More than four years after the opening of a judicial investigation, in particular for deception and involuntary injuries, a representative of the two companies answered, on Thursday, questions from a judge from the public health center of the Paris judicial court. “This step marks the beginning of the legal investigation in which Lactalis will fully and transparently commit”assures Lactalis, for whom “The challenge of this procedure is to allow the manifestation of scientific truth in this complex industrial file”.

In total, several dozen identified infants had been affected by salmonellosis in France at the end of 2017 after consuming a product for children, mainly of the Milumel or Picot brand, released from the Craon factory, located in Mayenne. In particular, Public Health France had identified 36 infants having consumed, in France, milk produced by Lactalis “within three days before the date of onset of their symptoms”.

Salmonellosis is food poisoning, which ranges from mild gastroenteritis to more serious infections, especially for young children, the elderly or debilitated. The withdrawal process had been chaotic and many malfunctions that led to contamination had been uncovered.

After several weeks of crisis, the group, renowned for its culture of secrecy, had withdrawn in mid-January 2018 all of its infant milk produced in the offending factory, the production of which had to be suspended for more than six months.

Several hundred complaints

The company headed by Emmanuel Besnier had claimed that the contamination was explained by “work carried out during 1^er semester 2017 ». But the site had already been contaminated with salmonella in 2005. The Institut Pasteur then announced that it had come to the conclusion that the bacteria present in Craon had survived between 2005 and 2017.

Several hundred complaints – including a large number for aggravated deception – were filed and several dozen people were interviewed by investigators. In October 2019, Mr. Besnier was heard in police custody, from which he emerged without prosecution.

“These indictments and this important consignment prove the existence of serious and consistent elements in this file”estimated with Agence France-Presse the lawyer Jade Dousselin, who defends the Association of families of victims of milk contaminated with salmonella.

“We hope that those responsible for this health scandal which affects children will be quickly sent back to the criminal court”commented François Lafforgue, lawyer for the German organization Foodwatch, who had filed a complaint.

According to an expert report rendered in October 2022 and added to the file, of which AFP journalists were aware, “the company lacked vigilance or even foresight vis-à-vis the repeated negative signals that alerted to a loss of manufacturing safety”.

“But the file in no way leads to the conclusion that the company would not have respected its pre-established commitments to comply with the requirements of the regulations (…) or that it would have marketed before December 1 (2017, editor’s note ) products knowing that they were contaminated with salmonella following a self-monitoring analysis”, however, add the experts. They also consider that the corrective actions taken on the site were “relevant”while considering that they “were not sufficient to achieve the expected result of product safety”.