Horvath, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Horvath, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

The Court of Appeal held that there is insufficient authority to conclude with complete confidence that differential implementation by devolved administrations within a Member State does not engage the EU law principle of non-discrimination or require objective justification. Given the lack of clear guidance from the European Court of Justice and the constitutional significance of the issue, the judge was correct to refer the discrimination question to the European Court of Justice. The appeal was dismissed.

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 From Administrative Court; Application to Set Aside Reference to European Court of Justice
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Non Discrimination Principle, Devolution, Implementation of EU Law, Subsidiarity, Judicial Review, Agricultural Policy
European Union Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Non Discrimination Principle Devolution Implementation of EU Law Subsidiarity +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 4 Authorities cited 22 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 From Administrative Court; Application to Set Aside Reference to European Court of Justice

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether differential implementation of EU obligations by devolved administrations within a Member State constitutes unlawful discrimination under EU law
  2. 2 Whether Article 5 of Council Regulation 1782/2003 permits regional implementation without objective justification for differences
  3. 3 Whether the reference to the European Court of Justice on the discrimination issue was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal held that there is insufficient authority to conclude with complete confidence that differential implementation by devolved administrations within a Member State does not engage the EU law principle of non-discrimination or require objective justification. Given the lack of clear guidance from the European Court of Justice and the constitutional significance of the issue, the judge was correct to refer the discrimination question to the European Court of Justice. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed; the reference to the European Court of Justice on the discrimination issue stands.
  • Direction to parties to consider preparing a summary of the judgments for the European Court of Justice, not exceeding fifteen A4 pages, subject to further submissions.