MuMa Restaurant — Restaurant in Borgio Verezzi

With all the good reviews here, I guess I'll be the weird one and say that Il MuMa was not a good experience, and that it left us wondering if we didn't understand the local food culture or if our experience really just was bad.

The good part is the service. We were met by very curtious waiters, who showed interest in making our stay a good time. Extra plus for the bread basket. But, I hope you'll consider setting some rules against smoking in the dining area, as the one table that really enjoyed smoking diminshed the experience a bit for the rest of us.

The bad part was unfortunately the food. Not that the food tasted poorly, it just didn't taste much at all. There wasn't any balance of sweet, salty, sour, bitter or umami - because the food barely tasted anything. We had 5 different dishes altogether, where three of them barely tasted anything.

For the starters, the foie gras was the best dish. It had nice salt flakes on top of the foie gras, and a good sweet and bitter sauce to go with it. The octopus-in-a-cup dish (which I can't remember the name of) was not very good, but it might be that us foreigners don't quite have the flavor for octopus in that style. There's a large amount of it, so be ready to use your big boy spoon. I think the problem is that it only tastes like octopus, and that the sauce/cream on top and the pea(?) mash at the bottom doesn't add anything to the flavor. It only tastes like octopus and nothing more.

For primi, the thyme ravioli was ok, but the saffron gnocchi was completely tasteless. The sauce seemed to me to be just corn starch, water and saffron.

For secondi we had the suckling pig, which was well made, but it was completely missing sides that complimented the meat. The potatoes and sauce that came with the meat was flavorless, and the dish was really missing something sweet and acidic to compliment the umami flavor of the meat.

We ended up skipping dessert because of the experience.

For the days afterwards we kept wondering if we just hadn't understood the cuisine, but after a trip to restaurant Petricore (which was absolutely amazing), I'm left with that this just wasn't a good food experience. The service and views were great, but unfortunately...

This weekend, me and my friends stumbled upon this hidden gem, it became the highlight of our visit to Borgio Verezzi. The moment we stepped into the restaurant, we were greeted by an atmosphere of luxury and sophistication, where the elegant decor, warm ambiance and the the smell of food cooking on the grill set the stage for an unforgettable dining experience. When we took our seats, overlooking the view of the shimmering sea coast, majestic mountains, and the twinkling lights of the old city, we knew we were in for a treat. Our waitress helped us to make a choice from a simple, yet sophisticated menu. We decided to share our dishes, so each of us could enjoy… we went for an innovative “CAPPUCCINO DI POLPO”with grilled octopus and a foam of potato purée, we were impressed. Dry-aged meat that was perfectly grilled, unfolded with sweetness and a rich taste of umami…the fragrant spagettone with aromatic pesto and purple prawn tartare and the tagliatelle with luscious lobster. All of this paired with fine wines from a great wine selection, every bite was a symphony of tastes. Even though there were minor hiccups with the service, our decision to dine at Il MuMa was truly a stroke of luck…a find that turned a simple weekend getaway into a gastronomic adventure we will always cherish. That breathtaking views will forever hold a special place...

È legale vietare l'ingresso ai bambini? In definitiva, pur non essendo presente una giurisprudenza affermata nel caso specifico, si può affermare che non è legale vietare l'ingresso in esercizi pubblici alle famiglie con bambini che potrebbero ben pensare di contattare le forze dell'ordine per far valere i propri diritti E’ legale vietare l’ingresso in ristoranti, hotel e luoghi aperti al pubblico alle famiglie con bambini? Alla domanda risponde un articolo pubblicato sul sito Studio Cataldi che chiama in causa l’art. 187 del Regolamento per l’esecuzione del TULPS (Testo Unico delle Leggi di Pubblica Sicurezza) secondo cui “Salvo quanto dispongono gli artt. 689 e 691 del codice penale, gli esercenti non possono senza un legittimo motivo, rifiutare le prestazioni del proprio esercizio a chiunque le domandi e ne corrisponda il prezzo”. Escluso quindi il caso di somministrazione di bevande alcoliche a minori o infermi di mente (Art 689 c.p.) ed il caso di somministrazione di bevande alcoliche a persone in stato di manifesta ubriachezza (Art 691 c.p.), nessun esercente può rifiutarsi di servire un cliente senza un motivo legittimo

Ma cosa si intende per motivo legittimo? Nella norma – continua il sito Studio Cataldi – non è specificato né è ovviamente presente un elenco di motivazioni ritenute legittime: questo rende molto complicata un’interpretazione unitaria. Può ritenersi legittima l’adduzione del motivo dello spazio ridotto all’interno del locale che renderebbe poco agevole l’entrata dei passeggini? Se la risposta fosse affermativa sarebbe allora lecito vietare l’ingresso alle persone portatrici di handicap?

La poca chiarezza della norma e l’assenza di una giurisprudenza in merito lascia molto, troppo, spazio a diverse interpretazioni. Ciò detto – conclude il sito Studio Cataldi – si può affermare che non è legale vietare l’ingresso in esercizi pubblici alle famiglie con bambini che potrebbero ben pensare di contattare le forze dell’ordine per far valere i propri diritti. Con un rischio per i gestori di essere sanzionati. La violazione dell’art 187 potrebbe portare non pochi guai all’esercente che si rifiuti di effettuare la prestazione: l’art. 221 bis del TULPS al primo comma prevede che “Le violazioni alle disposizioni di cui agli articoli 156, 187 e 225 del regolamento di esecuzione del presente testo unico […] sono soggette alla sanzione amministrativa del pagamento di una somma da € 516,00...