The defendant had been accused of storing unlicensed pesticides. He sought to argue that the European Regulations had been implemented in the UK in an unduly restrictive form. He entered a plea of guilty on a ruling that it was not open to him to challenge the regulations.
Held: The Regulations, which sought to control the use of parallel imports of pesticides, did appear to implement the regulation more tightly. The definition of what was materially identical to an approved pesticide created unnecessarily restrictions on approvals. The Directive was of direct effect. Boddington did not apply, but the importance of the case to the defendant was not properly a Boddington condition of challenging the legislation.
Judges:
Buxton LJ, Gibbs, Paget QC JJ
Citations:
Times 29-Aug-2003
Statutes:
Council Directive 91/414/EEC, Control of Pesticides Regulations 1986 (1986 No 1510), Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 16(12)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame (No 2) HL 11-Oct-1990
The validity of certain United Kingdom legislation was challenged on the basis that it contravened provisions of the EEC Treaty by depriving the applicants of their Community rights to fish in European waters, and an interlocutory injunction was . .
Cited – Boddington v British Transport Police HL 2-Apr-1998
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime, Environment, European
Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.185806