The authority refused to allow disembarkment of a cargo of shrimp. It’s risk assessment was based on failures by the cargo processor, but which failures did not create any risk to public health. The court held that the rejection could be challenged as unreasonable. In this case the rejection followed a risk assessment which disclosed no threat to public health, and the rejection of the cargo was unreasonable.
Citations:
Times 08-Jun-2001, [2001] EWHC Admin 246
Links:
Citing:
Appealed to – Regina (Seahawk Marine Foods Ltd) v Southampton Port Health Authority CA 31-Jan-2002
The company sought to import shrimps. The Port Authority had refused entry on the basis that they did not comply with standards of the Directive. The ‘aerobic colony counts’ in the condemned product exceeded the standards. The regulation did not . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Regina (Seahawk Marine Foods Ltd) v Southampton Port Health Authority CA 31-Jan-2002
The company sought to import shrimps. The Port Authority had refused entry on the basis that they did not comply with standards of the Directive. The ‘aerobic colony counts’ in the condemned product exceeded the standards. The regulation did not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Transport, Consumer
Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.140313