The defendants exported beef without the requisite certificates. The UK rules had been made before a Directive came into effect. On appeal after conviction the defendant argued that the rules purported to take account of future amendments. It was held that for a criminal sanction to be applicable, Regulations could not give effect to directives made by a third party without appropriate and explicit incorporation of those amendments. A regulation imposing sanctions for failure to comply with an EC Directive is not to be read as applying to future amendments to the Directive unless the wording of the regulations is such as clearly to take account of the possibility of future amendments.
Judges:
Kennedy LJ and Jackson
Citations:
Times 12-Oct-2000, Gazette 03-Aug-2000, [2001] EHLR 5
Cited by:
Applied – Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v ASDA Stores Ltd and Another QBD 24-Jun-2002
The defendant store had been accused of failing to comply with standards for grading of agricultural produce. They had been acquitted, following Mayne, on the basis that the prosecution was under European regulations introduced after the Act . .
Cited – Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs v ASDA Stores Limited and another HL 18-Dec-2003
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Administrative, Crime, European, Agriculture
Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83488