Cleveland Meat Company Limited purchased a bull at Darlington Farmers market. After the animal was slaughtered, the Official Veterinarian (‘OV’) found that the animal was diseased and so declared it unfit for human consumption, and refused to award it a health mark. Cleveland did not agree with the OV’s decision, and sought to challenge the OV’s decision. The FSA said there was no right to appeal against or challenge a decision of an OV as to the fitness of meat for human consumption. Cleveland brought a claim for judicial review of the decision that it had no right of appeal against the OV’s decision.
Held: Two questions were referred to the ECJ: (1) Do Regulations (EC) Nos 854/2004 and 882/2004 preclude a procedure whereby pursuant to section 9 of the 1990 Act a Justice of the Peace decides on the merits of the case and on the basis of the evidence of experts called by each side whether a carcass fails to comply with food safety requirements?
(2) Does Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 mandate a right of appeal in relation to a decision of an OV under article 5.2 of Regulation (EC) No 854/2004 that the meat of a carcass was unfit for human consumption and, if it does, what approach should be applied in reviewing the merits of the decision taken by the OV on an appeal in such a case?
Judges:
Lady Hale, President, Lord Hodge, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Sales
Citations:
[2019] UKSC 36, [2019] WLR(D) 463, [2020] 1 All ER 70, [2020] 1 All ER 703, [2019] PTSR 1443, UKSC 2017/0126
Links:
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2019 Mar 05 am Summary, SC 2019 Mar 05 pm Video
Statutes:
Food Safety Act 1990 9, Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs, Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, Regulation (EC) No 854/2004
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
At first Instance – Association of Independent Meat Suppliers and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Food Standards Agency Admn 2-Jul-2015
A bull was bought at auction, certified ante-mortem as fit, and slaughtered. On slaughter however it was found to suffer a form of septicemia. The claimant disagreed, but the defendant said there was no appeal from the Official Veterinarian’s . .
Appeal from – The Association of Independent Meat Suppliers and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Food Standards Agency CA 20-Jun-2017
Appeal from refusal of judicial review of the system for imposing controls on slaughterhouses. . .
Cited – Booker Aquaculture ECJ 10-Jul-2003
(Judgment) Directive 93/53/EEC – Destruction of fish stocks infected by viral haemorrhagic septicaemia (VHS) and infectious salmon anaemia (ISA) – Compensation – Obligations of the Member State – Protection of fundamental rights, particularly of the . .
Cited – Booker Aquaculture (Principles Of Community Law) ECJ 10-Jul-2003
Directive 93/53/EEC – Destruction of fish stocks infected by viral haemorrhagic septicaemia (VHS) and infectious salmon anaemia (ISA) – Compensation – Obligations of the Member State – Protection of fundamental rights, particularly of the right to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract, Animals, European
Updated: 16 April 2022; Ref: scu.640085