Secretary of State for the Home Department v Campaign To End All Animal Experiments (t/a the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection), R (on the application of)

Secretary of State for the Home Department v Campaign To End All Animal Experiments (t/a the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection), R (on the application of)

The Chief Inspector and Secretary of State did not misconstrue the Guidance or commit legal error in assigning 'moderate' severity limits to the protocols; humane killing is not itself an adverse effect requiring a 'substantial' severity limit, and the assessment of severity is a matter of expert scientific judgment. The arrangements for animal care and monitoring were found to be adequate on the evidence, and minor deficiencies did not render the overall conclusion irrational or unlawful.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Secretary of State for the Home Department; Respondent/claimant: The Queen on the Application of Campaign to End All Animal Experiments (trading as The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Statutory Interpretation, Licensing of Animal Experiments, Standards of Care for Laboratory Animals
Administrative Law Animal Welfare Law Public Law Judicial Review Statutory Interpretation Licensing of Animal Experiments Standards of Care for Laboratory Animals

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Appellant/defendant

The Queen on the Application of Campaign to End All Animal Experiments (trading as The British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection)

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Chief Inspector and Secretary of State misconstrued statutory Guidance under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 regarding severity limits for animal research protocols
  2. 2 Whether the assignment of 'moderate' rather than 'substantial' severity limits to certain protocols was perverse or vitiated by legal error
  3. 3 Whether arrangements for overnight care and monitoring of animals were adequate under statutory and licence conditions

Ratio Decidendi

The Chief Inspector and Secretary of State did not misconstrue the Guidance or commit legal error in assigning 'moderate' severity limits to the protocols; humane killing is not itself an adverse effect requiring a 'substantial' severity limit, and the assessment of severity is a matter of expert scientific judgment. The arrangements for animal care and monitoring were found to be adequate on the evidence, and minor deficiencies did not render the overall conclusion irrational or unlawful.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration set aside; no relief granted to claimants
  • Cross-appeal on adequacy of animal care dismissed