Last Updated: 3 August 09
The Red Bull Company Limited was ordered to pay a record £271,800 on 27 July 2009 after failing to recover and recycle packaging waste.
The London based soft drinks importer pleaded guilty at Southwark Crown Court to charges of failing to register with the Environment Agency as a producer of packaging waste, and charges of failing to meet its requirements to recover and recycle packaging waste with respect to each of the eight years between 1999 and 2006, a total of sixteen charges.
The company was fined £261,278.00 and ordered it to pay £3755.00 in costs to the Environment Agency. The company was ordered to pay compensation of £6854.00 to the Environment Agency for unpaid registration fees for the years 1999 to 2006 inclusive.
This overtakes the previous highest fine of £225,000 which was imposed in January 2008 on a Midlands company that also failed to register as a producer of packaging waste.
Red Bull Company Limited approached the Environment Agency on 8 July 2007 to say that it was not registered with the Environment Agency or a compliance scheme. The company cooperated with the Environment Agency and attended an interview under caution on 12 March 2008,admitting that its turnover and packaging handled was more than the threshold limits allowed by the regulations. By not registering it was estimated that Red Bull made a saving of more than £180,000 .
Environment officer Helen Pavlou said: “The regulations are in place to encourage a reduction in the amount of packaging used by business and to decrease the amount of waste that is sent to landfill.
“While it is encouraging that the Red Bull Company Ltd came to us when they realised their mistake, it is disappointing that there are still companies that are not compliant with this important legislation more than a decade after it was passed.
“Money raised from compliance is invested in the recycling industry, so failure to comply by the Red Bull Company Ltd and other companies means that there is less investment in the recycling industry than there should be.”
Passing sentence Judge Geoffrey Rivlin QC praised Red Bull’s “auto whistle blowing” and said the £261,278 fine was “relatively modest” considering its turnover. But he said: “If there is to be a penalty there must be some impact.”
He added: “The defendant in this case is a company which is perhaps world renowned now and which has a massive turnover. If it had been the case the company had deliberately failed to register it might be expected the court impose a very substantial fine indeed.”
He said he took into account the fact there had been no deleterious environmental impact and the breaches were not motivated by financial gain.
