Greenpeace Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs [2005] EWCA Civ 1656 (31 October 2005)

Greenpeace Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs [2005] EWCA Civ 1656 (31 October 2005)

The Order was made within the statutory powers of Section 5A of the Sea Fish Conservation Act 1967 for marine environmental purposes; there is no requirement for sound scientific evidence as a condition of legality; the Minister considered relevant issues including displacement and safety; the Order was rational and not ultra vires; procedural and irrationality challenges fail.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 1656
Parties
Applicant/claimant: Greenpeace Ltd; Respondent/defendant: Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal (civil Division) Appeal From Administrative Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; permission to cross appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Ultra Vires, Wednesbury Unreasonableness, Marine Conservation, Bycatch Regulation, Costs
Administrative Law Environmental Law EU Law Judicial Review Ultra Vires Wednesbury Unreasonableness Marine Conservation Bycatch Regulation +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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Greenpeace Ltd

Applicant/claimant

Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the South-west Territorial Waters (Prohibition of Pair Trawling) Order 2004 was ultra vires under the Sea Fish Conservation Act 1967 and EU law
  2. 2 Whether the Minister failed to take account of material considerations (displacement of fishing effort)
  3. 3 Whether the Order was irrational or procedurally unfair

Ratio Decidendi

The Order was made within the statutory powers of Section 5A of the Sea Fish Conservation Act 1967 for marine environmental purposes; there is no requirement for sound scientific evidence as a condition of legality; the Minister considered relevant issues including displacement and safety; the Order was rational and not ultra vires; procedural and irrationality challenges fail.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; permission to cross appeal refused.

Orders

  • Appellant to pay respondent's costs of the appeal.
  • No order for costs in relation to the cross appeal.