The claimant sought to challenge the validity of the 2004 Regulations whereby the payment under the Single Payment Scheme was reduced because of the existence of a public right of way across the land.
Held: ‘there are cogent arguments for the validity of the crucial paragraphs of the England Regulations. My preliminary view is that the addition of the words ‘and environmental’ were intended to widen the scope of the minimum requirements. The reference in Annex IV to ‘habitats’ is significant. It appears to me that visible rights of way can properly be described as ‘landscape features’. ‘ The question was to be referred to the European Court of Justice.
Judges:
Crane J
Citations:
[2006] EWHC 1833 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Common Agricultural Policy Single Payment and Support Schemes (Cross Compliance) (England) Regulations 2004, Rights of Way Act 1980
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v International Stock Exchange, ex parte Else (1982) Ltd CA 1993
The court gave guidance on the circumstances under which questions should be referred to the European Court of Justice. . .
Cited – Gomez de la Cruz Talegon v Commission ECFI 9-Feb-2000
Europa Officials – Request for reclassification in grade – Objection of inadmissibility – Material new fact – Admissibility. . .
Cited – European Parliament v Council of the European Union 162111 ECJ 25-Feb-1999
ECJ Regulations on the protection of forests against atmospheric pollution and fire – Legal basis – Article 43 of the EC Treaty – Article 130s of the EC Treaty – Parliament’s prerogatives.
Cited – Etablissements Armand Mondiet SA v Armement Islais SARL ECJ 24-Nov-1993
Europa Where the high seas are concerned, the Community has the same rule-making authority in matters within its jurisdiction as that conferred under international law on the State whose flag the vessel is flying . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Agriculture, Land, European
Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243368
