My pre-game hockey ritual always included scarfing back a Dairy Milk chocolate bar. The caffeine-chocolate buzz really helped me focus on the hard rubber discs being shot at my head.

But, if I ever find ice again, and can fit into my goalie equipment currently being soiled by pigeon’s in Naylor’s barn back in Guelph, Ontario, I’ll think twice about the Dairy Milk ritual.

That’s because a U.K. court fined Cadbury Schweppes PLC 1 million pounds (euro1.48 million US$2 million) on Monday for salmonella contamination of its chocolate products.

Cadbury, which had pleaded guilty to violating food and hygiene regulations at earlier hearings, was also ordered to pay 152,000 pounds (euro225,000 US$309,000) in legal costs.

The judge was quoted as saying, "I regard this as a serious case of negligence. It therefore needs to be marked as such to emphasize the responsibility and care which the law requires of a company in Cadbury’s position."

Sallie Booth, a lawyer representing 12 people affected by the contamination, said, "The 1 million pound fine sends a clear message that companies who have a great deal of responsibility for protecting public health cannot afford to ignore a potentially dangerous situation and cannot take a risk with the public’s health."

Earlier, the court heard that Cadbury sought to save money and reduce wastage by introducing an "allowable tolerance level" for salmonella in its products. Barry Berlin, prosecuting Cadbury on behalf of Birmingham City Council, told the court that until 2003 Cadbury had destroyed any chocolate which tested positive for salmonella, adopting an approach that,

"no amount of testing will make a positive result go away. … They then changed it to what they believed to be an allowable tolerance level. They [Cadbury] sought to save money from wastage by allowing a tolerance for salmonella in their food. Large quantities of product were being destroyed and Cadbury’s were looking for ways of avoiding that and that’s what they did. There is no dispute that there is a linkage between the chocolate that was distributed by Cadbury and the poisoning that took place later on."

Mr Berlin added that there was no safe level for salmonella cells in ready-to-eat products and that the organism could survive in chocolate for years. The court also heard that chocolate acted as a protective layer for salmonella organisms, shielding them from acid in the stomach.