TA Gwillim & Sons, R (on the application of) v The Welsh Ministers [2010] EWCA Civ 1048 (06 October 2010)
The phrase 'production was adversely affected' in Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No. 1782/2003 is broad and includes situations where production was lower than it would otherwise have been due to agri-environmental commitments, including prevention or restriction of an intended increase. The claimant's production was adversely affected within the meaning of Article 40, justifying substitution of the reference period. The appeal is dismissed.
- Citation
- [2010] EWCA Civ 1048
- Parties
- Claimant/respondent: The Queen (on the application of TA Gwillim and Sons); Defendants/appellants: The Welsh Ministers
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 06 October 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Appeal From Administrative Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Interpretation of Council Regulation (ec) No. 1782/2003 Article 40, Single Payment Scheme, Agri Environmental Commitments, Hardship Provisions, Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Queen (on the application of TA Gwillim and Sons)
Claimant/respondent
The Welsh Ministers
Defendants/appellants
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Appeal From Administrative Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether 'production was adversely affected' under Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No. 1782/2003 requires a dip in production or includes prevention/restriction of an increase in production due to agri-environmental commitments
- 2 Whether land area is relevant in assessing adverse effect on production for hardship provisions
Ratio Decidendi
The phrase 'production was adversely affected' in Article 40 of Regulation (EC) No. 1782/2003 is broad and includes situations where production was lower than it would otherwise have been due to agri-environmental commitments, including prevention or restriction of an intended increase. The claimant's production was adversely affected within the meaning of Article 40, justifying substitution of the reference period. The appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Defendants' decision of 2 September 2008 quashed
- Defendants to take a fresh decision on the claimant's application for substitution of the reference period, without revisiting the factual finding on causation
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment