Alpaca Destruction order was lawful and Fair
Appeal by way of case stated against the decision of District Judge (Magistrates Court) Layton on 4 May 2021 sitting at Bristol Magistrates Court to grant a warrant to the respondent to enter a farm in Wooton-under-Edge, Gloucestershire, and remove and slaughter an alpaca-nevalea named Geronimo owned by the appellant. The appellant suggested that the test result for bovine tuberculosis was a false positive.
Held: The finding by the Administrative court was binding on the District Judge: ‘a decision of a higher court between essentially the same parties and in respect of the same subject matter and issues is binding on those parties in all its conclusions on those issues, whether they be factual or legal.’ The DJ had considered the evidence said to be new, and maintained the decision. That was not itself a perverse decision. Nor was the decision an unjustified interference or infringement of the claimant’s human rights. Nothing said by the claimant had been overlooked or not given a fair hearing. Her further and late evidence had been considered, and the SS had been free to refuse to allow further tests which need go no further to show the animal’s status.
Mr Justice Griffiths
[2021] EWHC 2325 (QB)
Bailii
Animal Healt Act 1981 32(1) 62A
England and Wales
Animals, Human Rights
Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.666701
