Horvath, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2007] EWCA Civ 620 (28 June 2007)

Horvath, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2007] EWCA Civ 620 (28 June 2007)

The Court of Appeal held that there is insufficient authority to resolve with complete confidence whether differential implementation of EU obligations by devolved administrations within a Member State constitutes unlawful discrimination under EU law or Article 14 ECHR. Given the lack of clear precedent and the constitutional significance of the issue, the judge was correct to refer the question to the European Court of Justice. The appeal against the order for reference was dismissed.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Civ 620
Parties
Claimant/respondent: R (Horvath); Defendant/appellant: Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) on Appeal From Administrative Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Devolution, Implementation of EU Law, Non Discrimination Principle, Common Agricultural Policy, Judicial Review, Reference to European Court of Justice
Administrative Law European Union Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Devolution Implementation of EU Law Non Discrimination Principle Common Agricultural Policy +2 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 24 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R (Horvath)

Claimant/respondent

Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) on Appeal From Administrative Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether differential implementation of EU obligations by devolved administrations within a Member State constitutes unlawful discrimination under EU law and/or Article 14 ECHR.
  2. 2 Whether Article 5 of Council Regulation 1782/2003 permits regional implementation and differential standards within a Member State without objective justification.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that there is insufficient authority to resolve with complete confidence whether differential implementation of EU obligations by devolved administrations within a Member State constitutes unlawful discrimination under EU law or Article 14 ECHR. Given the lack of clear precedent and the constitutional significance of the issue, the judge was correct to refer the question to the European Court of Justice. The appeal against the order for reference was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal against the order for reference to the European Court of Justice is dismissed.
  • The reference to the European Court of Justice on the discrimination issue stands.