Perth dessert cafe's mighty high tea revamp
Ms Mallis took over ownership of the cafe in 2020 after serving as head pastry chef, and announced the space would be undergoing a makeover in January this year.
Re-opening in a 'pastel dream' of vibrant florals in late February, the owner said long-time customers can expect the same focus on authentic, house-made products and elegant desserts they always had.
And they can be sure the dessert specialist is still behind the operation, despite some confusion it had changed hands. Kefi & Cake is the evolution of Bites by D. Credit: Zoe Mallis
'While the name has changed, the heart of the business remains the same, now infused with a deeper connection to my Greek heritage,' Ms Mallis told PerthNow.
''Kefi' is a Greek word that reflects joy, good vibes, and living in the moment — and that's exactly what Kefi & Cake stands for: good food, good people, and good fun.'
Ms Mallis has trained at the prestigious Le Cordon Bleu London culinary school, and was even commissioned to design a showcase cake for the Ritz' wedding open day. Wedding cake commissioned by The Ritz. Credit: Zoe Mallis
But beyond her sumptuous snacks, the owner is hoping to elevate the holistic experience as she leans further into the catering space.
'The pastels and florals tie in beautifully with our target market, which includes baby showers, hen's parties, and birthdays. It's about creating something memorable and perfectly suited to those special occasions,' she said. Kefi & Cakes' decadent desserts. Credit: Zoe Mallis
Those stopping by at her vibrant new cafe will notice there's more than just decadent desserts on the menu. Louis Vuitton dessert cake. Credit: Zoe Mallis
Buoyed by the feedback from guests, Ms Mallis said the community response has been overwhelmingly positive in the months since she rebranded.
'I often hear people say 'wow' when they walk in, and many have described us as a 'hidden gem,'' she said.
Kefi & Cakes is located at 147 Scarborough Beach Road in Mount Hawthorn.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
8 hours ago
- The Advertiser
This carbon policy has been a spectacular failure. Let's put this zombie in the ground for good
Like a reanimated corpse from The Walking Dead, carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the boondoggle "technology" that just wont die. As a way for governments to piss public money up the wall, CCS is incredibly effective. On almost every other front, its a spectacular failure. But apparently, Australia is set to be the "sequestration nation". Huzzah! In a perpetual triumph of hope of experience, Resources Minister Madeline King launched a new report on the "economic potential" of CCS this week from Low Emission Technology Australia. A fully networked CCS industry along the east coast could increase economic activity by tens of billions of dollars, according to the best-case scenario outlined in the report summary. The rhetoric is polished; the facts are not. Commercial-scale carbon capture and storage is like teleportation, a nice idea, but a total fantasy. Its perpetually 10 years away from fruition. Lets begin with Australias track record. I am old enough to remember when the coal industry promised commercial-scale CCS would be "bolted on" to our coal-fired power station fleet by 2015 at the latest. What a joke. Australias biggest CCS project is Chevrons Gorgon facility off the WA coast. Derived from the Greek word Gorgos, meaning fierce, terrible and grim, Gorgon is aptly named. It was supposed to capture up to 4 million tonnes of CO2 per year. It has never come close. Its running at about one-third of its capacity and has missed every major milestone. Has any government demanded a refund? Cancelled their permits to operate, granted on the promise 80 per cent of its pollution would be buried? Of course not. Chevron continues to pollute and profit, while CCS somehow still gets spun as a climate solution. Then theres ZeroGena $4.3 billion flagship clean coal project that failed spectacularly, sequestered no carbon, and cost taxpayers more than $100 million. Gorgon and ZeroGen are not the exception. They are the rule. CCS is an abject failure by any measure. Despite this, CCS is being resurrected once again - not because it works, but because it serves a purpose. It gives the fossil fuel industry the social licence to expand. Take the Middle Arm project in Darwin. Sold as sustainable development, its actually a petrochemical hub, reliant on fracking the Beetaloo Basin, greenwashed with the promise of burying its emissions. Or consider Santos Barossa gas project, one of the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel projects in Australias history and one of the dirtiest gas project in Australia. Governments arent just enabling this - theyre fast-tracking it. While essential environmental protections sit idle, the Albanese government prioritised legislation designed to help Santos bury its carbon abroad. Special special ''sea dumping" legislation allows it to offset pollution by piping it to Timor-Leste for burial. Once again, the public interest is playing second fiddle to fossil fuel profits. This is not a climate policy. Its a fossil fuel expansion plan with a CCS bow on top. The International Energy Agency and IPCC do mention CCS in some scenarios. But what they project is not a green light for governments to bet the house on unicorn technology. Rather, its a sober warning that if everything else fails - renewables, electrification, behaviour change - we might need some CCS. The path to net zero should not be built on desperation fallbacks and marketing strategies. And yet, here we are in 2025, still throwing public money and favourable legislation at a technology that has captured more political spin than carbon dioxide. Whats more, if CCS is so commercially viable, why does it always need billions in subsidies, bespoke legislation, and regulatory carve-outs to survive? Why does the fossil fuel industry only pursue it when it allows them to produce more fossil fuels? While we never seem to have enough money for things people need, like keeping the unemployed above the poverty line, or funding frontline domestic violence services, yet public funding for CCS seems to draw from the same bottomless bucket of money new submarines are funded from. The harsh truth is this: every dollar spent on CCS is a dollar not spent on proven climate solutions or on literally any other services or infrastructure we need. And we need to ask: if CCS was going to work, wouldnt it have done so by now? MORE EBONY BENNETT: Carbon capture and storage a proven failure economically and environmentally is still touted as some miracle solution. But what about what we know does work, and is available now? Are we at least investing in real solutions? Nope. Trees are still the cheapest most natural way to sequester carbon, yet native forest logging is still perfectly legal in some states. The NSW government has seen land-clearing jump by 40 per cent according to latest reports, and its long-promised Great Koala National Park is being logged instead of protected. So, we can all stop pretending governments are actually interested in sequestering carbon. The next decade is critical for climate action. We cant afford to waste it funding PR campaigns dressed up as policy. We already know the best and simplest way to reduce emissions is to stop approving massive expansion of Australias gas and coal industry, most of which is exported overseas. Australias fossil fuel exports are a huge source of pollution. But theyre also driving up the cost of living. Australia Institute research shows the massive expansion of gas exports on the east coast has tripled wholesale gas prices and doubled electricity prices. Stopping Australias massive gas and coal exports makes sense economically and environmentally. And theres no special legislation required. Australia doesnt need more magical thinking. We need policy integrity, political courage and practical solutions. End native forest logging. Stop approving new gas and coal projects. The government could do that starting today. Carbon capture and storage has had its chance and blew it. Twenty years, a billion dollars, and Australia has nothing to show for it. If the fossil fuel industry wants to waste more money on CCS, fine. But not a single cent more of public money need be wasted on this fantasy. Like a reanimated corpse from The Walking Dead, carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the boondoggle "technology" that just wont die. As a way for governments to piss public money up the wall, CCS is incredibly effective. On almost every other front, its a spectacular failure. But apparently, Australia is set to be the "sequestration nation". Huzzah! In a perpetual triumph of hope of experience, Resources Minister Madeline King launched a new report on the "economic potential" of CCS this week from Low Emission Technology Australia. A fully networked CCS industry along the east coast could increase economic activity by tens of billions of dollars, according to the best-case scenario outlined in the report summary. The rhetoric is polished; the facts are not. Commercial-scale carbon capture and storage is like teleportation, a nice idea, but a total fantasy. Its perpetually 10 years away from fruition. Lets begin with Australias track record. I am old enough to remember when the coal industry promised commercial-scale CCS would be "bolted on" to our coal-fired power station fleet by 2015 at the latest. What a joke. Australias biggest CCS project is Chevrons Gorgon facility off the WA coast. Derived from the Greek word Gorgos, meaning fierce, terrible and grim, Gorgon is aptly named. It was supposed to capture up to 4 million tonnes of CO2 per year. It has never come close. Its running at about one-third of its capacity and has missed every major milestone. Has any government demanded a refund? Cancelled their permits to operate, granted on the promise 80 per cent of its pollution would be buried? Of course not. Chevron continues to pollute and profit, while CCS somehow still gets spun as a climate solution. Then theres ZeroGena $4.3 billion flagship clean coal project that failed spectacularly, sequestered no carbon, and cost taxpayers more than $100 million. Gorgon and ZeroGen are not the exception. They are the rule. CCS is an abject failure by any measure. Despite this, CCS is being resurrected once again - not because it works, but because it serves a purpose. It gives the fossil fuel industry the social licence to expand. Take the Middle Arm project in Darwin. Sold as sustainable development, its actually a petrochemical hub, reliant on fracking the Beetaloo Basin, greenwashed with the promise of burying its emissions. Or consider Santos Barossa gas project, one of the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel projects in Australias history and one of the dirtiest gas project in Australia. Governments arent just enabling this - theyre fast-tracking it. While essential environmental protections sit idle, the Albanese government prioritised legislation designed to help Santos bury its carbon abroad. Special special ''sea dumping" legislation allows it to offset pollution by piping it to Timor-Leste for burial. Once again, the public interest is playing second fiddle to fossil fuel profits. This is not a climate policy. Its a fossil fuel expansion plan with a CCS bow on top. The International Energy Agency and IPCC do mention CCS in some scenarios. But what they project is not a green light for governments to bet the house on unicorn technology. Rather, its a sober warning that if everything else fails - renewables, electrification, behaviour change - we might need some CCS. The path to net zero should not be built on desperation fallbacks and marketing strategies. And yet, here we are in 2025, still throwing public money and favourable legislation at a technology that has captured more political spin than carbon dioxide. Whats more, if CCS is so commercially viable, why does it always need billions in subsidies, bespoke legislation, and regulatory carve-outs to survive? Why does the fossil fuel industry only pursue it when it allows them to produce more fossil fuels? While we never seem to have enough money for things people need, like keeping the unemployed above the poverty line, or funding frontline domestic violence services, yet public funding for CCS seems to draw from the same bottomless bucket of money new submarines are funded from. The harsh truth is this: every dollar spent on CCS is a dollar not spent on proven climate solutions or on literally any other services or infrastructure we need. And we need to ask: if CCS was going to work, wouldnt it have done so by now? MORE EBONY BENNETT: Carbon capture and storage a proven failure economically and environmentally is still touted as some miracle solution. But what about what we know does work, and is available now? Are we at least investing in real solutions? Nope. Trees are still the cheapest most natural way to sequester carbon, yet native forest logging is still perfectly legal in some states. The NSW government has seen land-clearing jump by 40 per cent according to latest reports, and its long-promised Great Koala National Park is being logged instead of protected. So, we can all stop pretending governments are actually interested in sequestering carbon. The next decade is critical for climate action. We cant afford to waste it funding PR campaigns dressed up as policy. We already know the best and simplest way to reduce emissions is to stop approving massive expansion of Australias gas and coal industry, most of which is exported overseas. Australias fossil fuel exports are a huge source of pollution. But theyre also driving up the cost of living. Australia Institute research shows the massive expansion of gas exports on the east coast has tripled wholesale gas prices and doubled electricity prices. Stopping Australias massive gas and coal exports makes sense economically and environmentally. And theres no special legislation required. Australia doesnt need more magical thinking. We need policy integrity, political courage and practical solutions. End native forest logging. Stop approving new gas and coal projects. The government could do that starting today. Carbon capture and storage has had its chance and blew it. Twenty years, a billion dollars, and Australia has nothing to show for it. If the fossil fuel industry wants to waste more money on CCS, fine. But not a single cent more of public money need be wasted on this fantasy. Like a reanimated corpse from The Walking Dead, carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the boondoggle "technology" that just wont die. As a way for governments to piss public money up the wall, CCS is incredibly effective. On almost every other front, its a spectacular failure. But apparently, Australia is set to be the "sequestration nation". Huzzah! In a perpetual triumph of hope of experience, Resources Minister Madeline King launched a new report on the "economic potential" of CCS this week from Low Emission Technology Australia. A fully networked CCS industry along the east coast could increase economic activity by tens of billions of dollars, according to the best-case scenario outlined in the report summary. The rhetoric is polished; the facts are not. Commercial-scale carbon capture and storage is like teleportation, a nice idea, but a total fantasy. Its perpetually 10 years away from fruition. Lets begin with Australias track record. I am old enough to remember when the coal industry promised commercial-scale CCS would be "bolted on" to our coal-fired power station fleet by 2015 at the latest. What a joke. Australias biggest CCS project is Chevrons Gorgon facility off the WA coast. Derived from the Greek word Gorgos, meaning fierce, terrible and grim, Gorgon is aptly named. It was supposed to capture up to 4 million tonnes of CO2 per year. It has never come close. Its running at about one-third of its capacity and has missed every major milestone. Has any government demanded a refund? Cancelled their permits to operate, granted on the promise 80 per cent of its pollution would be buried? Of course not. Chevron continues to pollute and profit, while CCS somehow still gets spun as a climate solution. Then theres ZeroGena $4.3 billion flagship clean coal project that failed spectacularly, sequestered no carbon, and cost taxpayers more than $100 million. Gorgon and ZeroGen are not the exception. They are the rule. CCS is an abject failure by any measure. Despite this, CCS is being resurrected once again - not because it works, but because it serves a purpose. It gives the fossil fuel industry the social licence to expand. Take the Middle Arm project in Darwin. Sold as sustainable development, its actually a petrochemical hub, reliant on fracking the Beetaloo Basin, greenwashed with the promise of burying its emissions. Or consider Santos Barossa gas project, one of the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel projects in Australias history and one of the dirtiest gas project in Australia. Governments arent just enabling this - theyre fast-tracking it. While essential environmental protections sit idle, the Albanese government prioritised legislation designed to help Santos bury its carbon abroad. Special special ''sea dumping" legislation allows it to offset pollution by piping it to Timor-Leste for burial. Once again, the public interest is playing second fiddle to fossil fuel profits. This is not a climate policy. Its a fossil fuel expansion plan with a CCS bow on top. The International Energy Agency and IPCC do mention CCS in some scenarios. But what they project is not a green light for governments to bet the house on unicorn technology. Rather, its a sober warning that if everything else fails - renewables, electrification, behaviour change - we might need some CCS. The path to net zero should not be built on desperation fallbacks and marketing strategies. And yet, here we are in 2025, still throwing public money and favourable legislation at a technology that has captured more political spin than carbon dioxide. Whats more, if CCS is so commercially viable, why does it always need billions in subsidies, bespoke legislation, and regulatory carve-outs to survive? Why does the fossil fuel industry only pursue it when it allows them to produce more fossil fuels? While we never seem to have enough money for things people need, like keeping the unemployed above the poverty line, or funding frontline domestic violence services, yet public funding for CCS seems to draw from the same bottomless bucket of money new submarines are funded from. The harsh truth is this: every dollar spent on CCS is a dollar not spent on proven climate solutions or on literally any other services or infrastructure we need. And we need to ask: if CCS was going to work, wouldnt it have done so by now? MORE EBONY BENNETT: Carbon capture and storage a proven failure economically and environmentally is still touted as some miracle solution. But what about what we know does work, and is available now? Are we at least investing in real solutions? Nope. Trees are still the cheapest most natural way to sequester carbon, yet native forest logging is still perfectly legal in some states. The NSW government has seen land-clearing jump by 40 per cent according to latest reports, and its long-promised Great Koala National Park is being logged instead of protected. So, we can all stop pretending governments are actually interested in sequestering carbon. The next decade is critical for climate action. We cant afford to waste it funding PR campaigns dressed up as policy. We already know the best and simplest way to reduce emissions is to stop approving massive expansion of Australias gas and coal industry, most of which is exported overseas. Australias fossil fuel exports are a huge source of pollution. But theyre also driving up the cost of living. Australia Institute research shows the massive expansion of gas exports on the east coast has tripled wholesale gas prices and doubled electricity prices. Stopping Australias massive gas and coal exports makes sense economically and environmentally. And theres no special legislation required. Australia doesnt need more magical thinking. We need policy integrity, political courage and practical solutions. End native forest logging. Stop approving new gas and coal projects. The government could do that starting today. Carbon capture and storage has had its chance and blew it. Twenty years, a billion dollars, and Australia has nothing to show for it. If the fossil fuel industry wants to waste more money on CCS, fine. But not a single cent more of public money need be wasted on this fantasy. Like a reanimated corpse from The Walking Dead, carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the boondoggle "technology" that just wont die. As a way for governments to piss public money up the wall, CCS is incredibly effective. On almost every other front, its a spectacular failure. But apparently, Australia is set to be the "sequestration nation". Huzzah! In a perpetual triumph of hope of experience, Resources Minister Madeline King launched a new report on the "economic potential" of CCS this week from Low Emission Technology Australia. A fully networked CCS industry along the east coast could increase economic activity by tens of billions of dollars, according to the best-case scenario outlined in the report summary. The rhetoric is polished; the facts are not. Commercial-scale carbon capture and storage is like teleportation, a nice idea, but a total fantasy. Its perpetually 10 years away from fruition. Lets begin with Australias track record. I am old enough to remember when the coal industry promised commercial-scale CCS would be "bolted on" to our coal-fired power station fleet by 2015 at the latest. What a joke. Australias biggest CCS project is Chevrons Gorgon facility off the WA coast. Derived from the Greek word Gorgos, meaning fierce, terrible and grim, Gorgon is aptly named. It was supposed to capture up to 4 million tonnes of CO2 per year. It has never come close. Its running at about one-third of its capacity and has missed every major milestone. Has any government demanded a refund? Cancelled their permits to operate, granted on the promise 80 per cent of its pollution would be buried? Of course not. Chevron continues to pollute and profit, while CCS somehow still gets spun as a climate solution. Then theres ZeroGena $4.3 billion flagship clean coal project that failed spectacularly, sequestered no carbon, and cost taxpayers more than $100 million. Gorgon and ZeroGen are not the exception. They are the rule. CCS is an abject failure by any measure. Despite this, CCS is being resurrected once again - not because it works, but because it serves a purpose. It gives the fossil fuel industry the social licence to expand. Take the Middle Arm project in Darwin. Sold as sustainable development, its actually a petrochemical hub, reliant on fracking the Beetaloo Basin, greenwashed with the promise of burying its emissions. Or consider Santos Barossa gas project, one of the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel projects in Australias history and one of the dirtiest gas project in Australia. Governments arent just enabling this - theyre fast-tracking it. While essential environmental protections sit idle, the Albanese government prioritised legislation designed to help Santos bury its carbon abroad. Special special ''sea dumping" legislation allows it to offset pollution by piping it to Timor-Leste for burial. Once again, the public interest is playing second fiddle to fossil fuel profits. This is not a climate policy. Its a fossil fuel expansion plan with a CCS bow on top. The International Energy Agency and IPCC do mention CCS in some scenarios. But what they project is not a green light for governments to bet the house on unicorn technology. Rather, its a sober warning that if everything else fails - renewables, electrification, behaviour change - we might need some CCS. The path to net zero should not be built on desperation fallbacks and marketing strategies. And yet, here we are in 2025, still throwing public money and favourable legislation at a technology that has captured more political spin than carbon dioxide. Whats more, if CCS is so commercially viable, why does it always need billions in subsidies, bespoke legislation, and regulatory carve-outs to survive? Why does the fossil fuel industry only pursue it when it allows them to produce more fossil fuels? While we never seem to have enough money for things people need, like keeping the unemployed above the poverty line, or funding frontline domestic violence services, yet public funding for CCS seems to draw from the same bottomless bucket of money new submarines are funded from. The harsh truth is this: every dollar spent on CCS is a dollar not spent on proven climate solutions or on literally any other services or infrastructure we need. And we need to ask: if CCS was going to work, wouldnt it have done so by now? MORE EBONY BENNETT: Carbon capture and storage a proven failure economically and environmentally is still touted as some miracle solution. But what about what we know does work, and is available now? Are we at least investing in real solutions? Nope. Trees are still the cheapest most natural way to sequester carbon, yet native forest logging is still perfectly legal in some states. The NSW government has seen land-clearing jump by 40 per cent according to latest reports, and its long-promised Great Koala National Park is being logged instead of protected. So, we can all stop pretending governments are actually interested in sequestering carbon. The next decade is critical for climate action. We cant afford to waste it funding PR campaigns dressed up as policy. We already know the best and simplest way to reduce emissions is to stop approving massive expansion of Australias gas and coal industry, most of which is exported overseas. Australias fossil fuel exports are a huge source of pollution. But theyre also driving up the cost of living. Australia Institute research shows the massive expansion of gas exports on the east coast has tripled wholesale gas prices and doubled electricity prices. Stopping Australias massive gas and coal exports makes sense economically and environmentally. And theres no special legislation required. Australia doesnt need more magical thinking. We need policy integrity, political courage and practical solutions. End native forest logging. Stop approving new gas and coal projects. The government could do that starting today. Carbon capture and storage has had its chance and blew it. Twenty years, a billion dollars, and Australia has nothing to show for it. If the fossil fuel industry wants to waste more money on CCS, fine. But not a single cent more of public money need be wasted on this fantasy.
ABC News
3 days ago
- ABC News
Tanker believed to be carrying fuel processed in India from Russian oil docks in Western Australia
A tanker believed to be carrying fuel derived from Russian oil has docked in Western Australia, with question marks surrounding the cargo exposing glaring loopholes in government sanctions against Moscow. Seferis sails under a Greek flag and berthed in Kwinana, 40 kilometres south of Perth, about 3am on Wednesday after departing India on July 11. Australia sanctioned Russian oil soon after it invaded Ukraine in February 2022. But India did not and refines Russian crude oil into liquid fuels like diesel and petroleum. When Australia purchases those products from India, it could be inadvertently funding the war in Ukraine. The issue is, there is no real way to confirm the origins of the fuel on Seferis, let alone what is being pumped at the bowser. Russia's income from exporting oil is the backbone of its economy and has effectively bankrolled the nation's war machine in Ukraine for three-and-a--half years. While Australia has committed to starving that revenue, the involvement of third parties like India has muddied the waters. Director of national security at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, John Coyne, said the majority of the country's imported liquid fuel does not come from India, but that does not clear up the issue at hand. "If Australia is to meet its full commitment of applying those sanctions, then it must also ensure that we don't contribute to a system that washes Russian oil through India," he said. Mr Coyne said Australia could follow the lead of the European Union, which applied sanctions to refineries that use Russian crude oil. "The first step here is making that very clear declaration that Australia will not take liquid fuels that find their origin in Russian oil and result in the transfer of money back into Russia that inevitably is used to prosecute and fund the campaign in Ukraine," he said. Ukrainian and Australian campaigners say Seferis is delivering fuel from the Jamnagar refinery in India. The Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) found in the first half of this year, almost half of Jamnagar's crude oil feedstock came from Russia. "This crude is refined into a variety of oil products — gasoline, diesel, jet fuel etc. Any country importing these products from this specific refinery can expect Russian molecules in them," CREA's EU-Russia analyst Vaibhav Raghunandan said. CREA estimated in the first four months of 2025 Australia bought more than $1 billion of oil from India that was derived from Russian crude. Earlier this month, two vessels carrying 175,000 tonnes of oil from the Jamnagar refinery berthed at Botany Bay in Sydney. The federal government said it had imposed more than 1,500 sanctions on Russia, including measures to restrict the import of oil that originated in Russia. In June, Foreign Minister Penny Wong announced Australia's first sanctions against Russia's shadow fleet, which employs a variety of murky tactics to conceal the origins of its cargo. "Regrettably, the mechanisms we would need to track and monitor all energy products via third countries are not in place in those countries," a spokesperson for Ms Wong said. "We are evaluating options to place further pressure on Russia's oil revenues." Speaking on Tuesday, WA's Defence Industries Minister Paul Papalia said the western world needed to be alert to the prospect of "Russia getting around sanctions and getting its oil to market … by sneaky means". "I think that is a real threat, anywhere in the world," Mr Papalia said. "Russia is still selling its oil around the world and they do it by third parties, things like refining in [third party] countries and then exporting." An international law expert said without mechanisms to oversee third party imports, the option to cut off India from Australia's supply is theoretically on the table. Australia introduced its autonomous sanctions laws, allowing it to impose sanctions independently of the United Nations, in 2011 and it has given flexibility to the government to target restrictions. "They can issue sanctions on a particular product and how we import that, which could include banning importing through a third-party state if it can be connected back to Russian oil," said Melanie O'Brien, an associate professor of international law at the University of Western Australia. Mr Coyne said the government would have to weigh up the implications of a drastic move like cutting ties with India. "At the pump, Australians want to pay the cheapest possible price for liquid fuel," he said. "There's [also] the pressure of our diplomatic relationship at a bilateral level with India. "All of these things play out."
Perth Now
24-07-2025
- Perth Now
Perth dessert cafe's mighty high tea revamp
Honouring the past while looking to the future has been no cake walk for Kefi & Cakes owner Zoe Mallis, who sought to refresh Mt Hawthorn's Bites by D earlier this year to align with an evolving dessert and high tea market. Ms Mallis took over ownership of the cafe in 2020 after serving as head pastry chef, and announced the space would be undergoing a makeover in January this year. Re-opening in a 'pastel dream' of vibrant florals in late February, the owner said long-time customers can expect the same focus on authentic, house-made products and elegant desserts they always had. And they can be sure the dessert specialist is still behind the operation, despite some confusion it had changed hands. Kefi & Cake is the evolution of Bites by D. Credit: Zoe Mallis 'While the name has changed, the heart of the business remains the same, now infused with a deeper connection to my Greek heritage,' Ms Mallis told PerthNow. ''Kefi' is a Greek word that reflects joy, good vibes, and living in the moment — and that's exactly what Kefi & Cake stands for: good food, good people, and good fun.' Ms Mallis has trained at the prestigious Le Cordon Bleu London culinary school, and was even commissioned to design a showcase cake for the Ritz' wedding open day. Wedding cake commissioned by The Ritz. Credit: Zoe Mallis But beyond her sumptuous snacks, the owner is hoping to elevate the holistic experience as she leans further into the catering space. 'The pastels and florals tie in beautifully with our target market, which includes baby showers, hen's parties, and birthdays. It's about creating something memorable and perfectly suited to those special occasions,' she said. Kefi & Cakes' decadent desserts. Credit: Zoe Mallis Those stopping by at her vibrant new cafe will notice there's more than just decadent desserts on the menu. Louis Vuitton dessert cake. Credit: Zoe Mallis Buoyed by the feedback from guests, Ms Mallis said the community response has been overwhelmingly positive in the months since she rebranded. 'I often hear people say 'wow' when they walk in, and many have described us as a 'hidden gem,'' she said. Kefi & Cakes is located at 147 Scarborough Beach Road in Mount Hawthorn.
