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 creating the offence had been enacted.
Held: Mayne’s case dealt with Directives, and they were not directly comparable with regulations having direct effect. Nevertheless, it remained for Parliament to state what was criminal behaviour and what was not. The offence under the emended regulations was indeed unknown to English law.
Judges:
Lord Justice Rose and Mr Justice Gibbs
Citations:
Times 27-Jun-2002, Gazette 08-Aug-2002
Statutes:
Agriculture and Horticulture Act 1964 14, Grading of Horticulture Produce (Amendment) Regulations 1973 (SI 1973 No 22)
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Mayne and Another v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food QBD 3-Aug-2000
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Consumer, European
Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.174123
