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 require there to be shown actual danger, but only potential danger to public health. This accorded with public policy. The appeal succeeded.
Mummery, Buxton and Longmore LLJ
Times 05-Feb-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 54
Bailii
Products of Animal Origin (Import and Export) Regulations 1996 (SI 1996 No 3124) 25, Fishery Products Directive (Council Directive 91/493/EEC)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromSeahawk Marine Foods Limited v Southampton Port Health Authority Admn 5-Apr-2001
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 . .

Cited by:
Appealed toSeahawk Marine Foods Limited v Southampton Port Health Authority Admn 5-Apr-2001
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 January 2021; Ref: scu.167553