Langton & Anor, R (On The Application Of) v Department For The Environment, Food & Rural Affairs & Anor [2001] EWHC Admin 1047 (17th December, 2001)

Langton & Anor, R (On The Application Of) v Department For The Environment, Food & Rural Affairs & Anor [2001] EWHC Admin 1047 (17th December, 2001)

The court held that the Human Rights Act 1998 did not apply to the First Defendant's decision made before its commencement. For the Second Defendant's post-October 2000 decision, Article 6 ECHR was engaged, but the availability of judicial review and the procedures followed satisfied the requirements of Article 6. The actions taken were found to be proportionate and lawful, and there was no breach of Article 1 of the First Protocol or Council Directive 90/667/EEC. The claim was dismissed.

Citation
[2001] EWHC Admin 1047
Parties
Claimant: Matthew Joseph Langton; Claimant: Denley George Allen; First Defendant: Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; Second Defendant: Derbyshire County Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Animal by Products Disposal, Enforcement of Statutory Notices, Right to Fair Trial (article 6 Echr), Protection of Property (a1 P1 Echr), Proportionality in Public Law, Judicial Review Grounds
Administrative Law Environmental Law Human Rights Animal by Products Disposal Enforcement of Statutory Notices Right to Fair Trial (article 6 Echr) Protection of Property (a1 P1 Echr) Proportionality in Public Law +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Joseph Langton

Claimant

Denley George Allen

Claimant

Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

First Defendant

Derbyshire County Council

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the enforcement action and statutory notice breached Article 6 ECHR (right to fair trial) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property)
  2. 2 Whether the lack of an appeal to an independent tribunal under the Animal By-Products Order 1999 is compatible with Article 6 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the actions of the defendants were unreasonable, disproportionate, or unfair under public law

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the Human Rights Act 1998 did not apply to the First Defendant's decision made before its commencement. For the Second Defendant's post-October 2000 decision, Article 6 ECHR was engaged, but the availability of judicial review and the procedures followed satisfied the requirements of Article 6. The actions taken were found to be proportionate and lawful, and there was no breach of Article 1 of the First Protocol or Council Directive 90/667/EEC. The claim was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Application for judicial review refused
  • No relief granted to claimants