swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Agriculture - From: 2003 To: 2003
This page lists 25 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Greece v Commission (Judgment) C-157/00; [2003] EUECJ C-157/00
9 Jan 2003
ECJ
European, Agriculture
Europa EAGGF - Clearance of accounts - 1996 to 1998 - Export refunds - Fruit and vegetables.
[ Bailii ]
Hammarsten (Judgment) C-462/01; [2003] EUECJ C-462/01
16 Jan 2003
ECJ
European, Commercial, Agriculture
Europa Common organisation of the markets in the flax and hemp sector - Articles 28 EC and 30 EC - National legislation prohibiting all cultivation and possession of hemp without prior authorisation.
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Kelsall and Others) v Secretary of State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs) Times, 27 March 2003; [2003] EWHC 656 (Admin)
13 Mar 2003
Admn
Stanley Burton J
Agriculture
The claimants were mink farmers. They challenged the order arranging compensation for the closure of their businesses following the ban on fur farming. Held: The provisions of the order were arbitrary and unfair, failing to take into account different values of premium brands. The Order was to be quashed.
Fur Farming Prohibition Act 2000 - Fur Farming (Compensation Scheme) (England) Order 2002 (2002 No 221)
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Kelsall and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2003] EWHC 459 (Admin)
13 Mar 2003
Admn
Stanley Burnton J
Administrative, Agriculture
The claimants had had their fur farming business closed under the 2000 Act. They now challanged the order implementing compensation for the loss.
Fur Farming (Compensation Scheme) (England) Order 2002 - Fur Farming Prohibition Act 2000
[ Bailii ]
Clement, Regina (on the Application Of) v Durham County Magistrates' Court [2003] EWHC 1154 (Admin)
26 Mar 2003
Admn
Animals, Agriculture
Pigs (Records, Identification and Movement) Order 1995
[ Bailii ]
Eduardo Vieira And Vieira Argentina v Commission T-126/01 T-126/01; [2003] EUECJ T-126/01
3 Apr 2003
ECJ
Agriculture
ECJ Fisheries - Fisheries agreement with Argentina - Community financial aid - Reduction - Actions for annulment - Actions for damages
[ Bailii ]
Eduardo Vieira And Vieira Argentina v Commission T-119/01 T-119/01; [2003] EUECJ T-119/01
3 Apr 2003
ECJ
K Lenaerts, P
Agriculture
ECJ Fisheries - Fisheries agreement with Argentina - Community financial aid - Reduction - Actions for annulment - Actions for damages
[ Bailii ]
Eduardo Vieira and Vieira Argentina v Commission T-44/01 T-44/01; [2003] EUECJ T-44/01
3 Apr 2003
ECFI
Agriculture
(Judgment) Action for annulment - Action for damages.
[ Bailii ]
Joachim Steffensen C-276/01; [2003] EUECJ C-276/01
10 Apr 2003
ECJ
M. Wathelet, P
European, Agriculture
ECJ Directive 89/397/EEC - Official control of foodstuffs - Second subparagraph of Article 7(1) - Analysis of samples - Right to a second opinion - Direct effect - Admissibility of the results of analyses as evidence in the event of an infringement of the right to a second opinion
Directive 89/397/EEC
[ Bailii ]
RAR (Judgment) C-282/00; [2003] EUECJ C-282/00
15 May 2003
ECJ
European, Agriculture
Europa Sugar - Decision 91/315/EEC - Poseima Programme - Specific measures in favour of the Azores and Madeira - Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 - Shipment to the rest of the Community of white sugar produced in the Azores from sugarbeet harvested there or from raw beet sugar imported exempt from levies and/or customs duties - Meaning of 'processing of products' - Meaning of 'traditional shipment to the rest of the Community'.
[ Bailii ]
Ministry of Defence v Spencer and Another Times, 09 June 2003; Gazette, 17 July 2003
22 May 2003
CA
Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Waller and Lord Justice Mantell
Agriculture, Landlord and Tenant
The parties had varied the agricultural tenancy. A small parcel had been added, and the rent increased to reflect only that additional land. The tenant claimed that, under the Act, this operated to skip the next rent review. Held: The phrase "terms of the tenancy" was not a term of art, but was to be constrrued with its natural meaning. 'Any other variation of the terms of the tenancy' would include an extension of the holding to add land. Appeal dismissed.
Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 Sch2
1 Cites
1 Citers
Shetland Sea Farms Ltd, Assuranceforeningen Skuld v International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund and others; ScS 28-May-2003 - [2003] ScotCS 153
Quark Fishing Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2003] EWHC 1743 (Admin)
22 Jul 2003
Admn
Collins J
Licensing, Agriculture, Human Rights
The respondent had failed to renew the claimant's license to fish in the South Atlantic for Patagonian Toothfish. The refusal had been found to be unlawful. The claimant now sought damages. Held: English law does not generally provide a remedy in damages for a breach of a public law right. There must exist a private law cause of action, which may be for breach of statutory duty or at common law. The claimant sought to bring its claim within the 1998 Act, saying the convention requires a state to give rights to those within their jurisdiction, but the ambit of the Act had not been extended to South Georgia, and so no action arose. A licence to carry out an economic activity could amount to a possession within the meaning of Article 1PI.
Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources - Human Rights Act 1998 7 - European Convention on Human Rights
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v The Competition Commission, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and The Director General of Fair Trading, ex parte Milk Marque Ltd and National Farmers' Union C-137/00; Times, 25 September 2003; [2003] EUECJ C-137/00
9 Sep 2003
ECJ
European, Agriculture
Europa Reference for a preliminary ruling: High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Queen's Bench Division (Crown Office) - United Kingdom. Common agricultural policy - Articles 32 EC to 38 EC - Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 - Common organisation of the market in milk and milk products - Target price for milk - Regulation No 26 - Application of certain competition rules to the production of and trade in agricultural products - Whether Member States may apply national competition rules to milk producers who choose to organise themselves into cooperatives and hold market power.
The claimants asserted that the Respondents had sought to interfere wrongfully in their commercial activities insofar as they sought to create vertical integration of their market, ading new products to their existing ones. Held: The existence of an EC community organisation of a particular economic sector, in this case the market for milk products, did not preclude a national authority involving itself in the regulation of that sector within its boundary provided it took no step which might undermine or create exceptions to that common organisation. The Court may refuse to rule on a question referred for a preliminary ruling by a national court only where it is quite obvious that the interpretation of Community law that is sought bears no relation to the actual facts of the main action or its purpose, where the problem is hypothetical, or where the Court does not have before it the factual or legal material necessary to give a useful answer to the questions submitted to it.
[ Bailii ]
United Kingdom v Commission (Judgment) C-346/00; [2003] EUECJ C-346/00
18 Sep 2003
ECJ
European, Agriculture
Europa EAGGF - Clearance of accounts - Financial years 1996 and 1997 - Arable crops
[ Bailii ]
Hellenic Republic v Commission of the European Communities C-331/00; [2003] EUECJ C-331/00
18 Sep 2003
ECJ
Agriculture, European
EAGGF - Clearance of accounts - Financial years 1996, 1997 and 1998 - Arable crops - Beef - Aid for early retirement
[ Bailii ]
Regina on the Application of Feakins v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2003] EWCA Civ 1546; Times, 07 November 2003; Gazette, 02 January 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 1761
4 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Thorpe Lord Justice Dyson
Agriculture, Environment, Judicial Review
The applicant farmer had substantial volumes of potentially contaminated carcasses on his land. The respondent derogated from the European regulations which would have arranged for the disposal of the carcasses. The respondent challenged the standing of the applicant to seek review of the decision. The judge acknowledged the possibility that the applicant had only his private interests at heart, but considered that he could proceed because of the significance of the decision under review. The applicant's motive was capable of being relevant, but was not such here as to make the application an abuse.
Dyson LJ addressed the question of abuse of process in the context of Judicial Review proceedings, saying: "In my judgment, if a claimant has no sufficient private interest to support a claim to standing, then he should not be accorded standing merely because he raises an issue in which there is, objectively speaking, a public interest. As Sedley J said in R v Somerset County Council, Ex p Dixon [1997] JPL 1030, when considering the issue of standing, the court had to ensure that the claimant was not prompted by an ill motive, and was not a mere busybody or a trouble-maker. Thus, if a claimant seeks to challenge a decision in which he has no private law interest, it is difficult to conceive of circumstances in which the court will accord him standing, even where there is a public interest in testing the lawfulness of the decision, if the claimant is acting out of ill-will or for some other improper purpose. It is an abuse of process to permit a claimant to bring a claim in such circumstances. If the real reason why a claimant wishes to challenge a decision in which, objectively, there is a public interest is not that he has a genuine concern about the decision, but some other reason, then that is material to the question whether he should be accorded standing."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Netherlands v Commission C-501/01; [2003] EUECJ C-501/01
6 Nov 2003
ECJ
European, Agriculture
Commission Decision 2001/739/EC of 17 October 2001 on the total amount of Community aid for the eradication of classical swine fever in the Netherlands in 1998
[ Bailii ]
Commission v France (Judgment) C-296/01; [2003] EUECJ C-296/01
20 Nov 2003
ECJ
European, Agriculture
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Failure to transpose Directive 90/220/EEC - Genetically modified organisms.
Directive 90/220/EEC
[ Bailii ]
Sociedad Cooperativa General Agropecuaria (ACOR) v Administracion General del Estado C-416/01; [2003] EUECJ C-416/01
20 Nov 2003
ECJ
European, Agriculture
ECJ Common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector - Reallocation or transfer of quotas - Interpretation of Council Regulations (EEC) No 1785/81, (EEC) No 193/82 and (EC) No 1260/2001 - Decision of competent authorities of a Member State, when approving a merger, to reallocate sugar production quotas - Sale by public auction - Transfer of quotas for consideration.
[ Bailii ]
Unitymark Ltd , Regina (on the Application of) v Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2003] EWHC 2748 (Admin)
21 Nov 2003
Admn
Agriculture, European, Judicial Review
[ Bailii ]
Compassion in World Farming Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2003] EWHC 2850 (Admin); Times, 05 December 2003
27 Nov 2003
Admn
Newman J
Agriculture, European, Animals
The Directive sought to provide welfare protection for battery chickens. The applicant complained that the farming techniques which restricted diet in order to encourage fast growth would have been prevented if the respondent had properly implemented the Directive in its Code under the 1968 Act, and in the 2000 Regulations. They said that the Directive required the respondent to control compliance through criminal sanctions. The respondent had adopted a scheme of only civil enforcement. Held: The obligations were expressed in a general fashion, which was to be taken to allow the respondent a discretion as to how the objectives could be achieved. The objectives of the Directive were not to be confused with the means of attaining them. The respondent was entitled to conclude that a criminal code might be counter-productive.
Council Directive 98/58/EC - Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1968 2 - Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2000
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
South Wales Sea Fisheries Committee v Saunders Times, 05 December 2003; [2003] EWHC 3054 (Admin)
27 Nov 2003
Admn
Agriculture, Crime
The defendant trawlerman was seen with his nets in the water within the six mile limit, and he faced a prosecution. He replied that the only acts undertaken within the limit had been acts of maintenance of his nets. Held: In the breaking open of nets to release debris rocks and fish back into the sea, he was not either 'engaged in fishing operations' and nor was he using an instrument of fishing'. The words had to be given their natural meaning.
Sea Fisheries Regulation Act 1996 5
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v ASDA Stores Limited and another [2003] UKHL 71; Times, 19 December 2003; Gazette, 29 January 2004; [2004] ACD 28; [2003] NPC 160; (2004) 168 JP 1; [2004] Eu LR 549; [2004] 1 WLR 105; [2004] 1 CMLR 42; [2004] 1 All ER 268
18 Dec 2003
HL
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Millett, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
European, Agriculture
The company was prosecuted for offences under the Regulations, relating to the designation of horticultural produce for sale. The original Act had been relied upon to implement the European regulations after entry to the EU. Held: The offences were properly charged. The scope for the subsequent regulations were, to the extent they were not excluded by subsection (3), all directly applicable European Regulations applied whether or not they predated the 1964 Act. "offence-creating provisions must always be expressed with sufficient clarity and precision. But the mechanism chosen by Parliament for implementing Community obligations is a matter of legislative choice for Parliament. Particularly where Community legislation may be changed frequently, Parliament may choose to adopt an approach which does not involve making new implementing regulations whenever Community legislation changes. Courts should not approach the interpretation of implementing statutes or regulations as though there were a presumption that they do not embrace future changes in Community legislation. There is no such presumption."
Agriculture and Horticulture Act 1964 11(1) 11(3)
1 Cites
[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
Field and Another v Bryant and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1957
18 Dec 2003
CA
Agriculture
[ Bailii ]
