Mott & Anor v Environment Agency

Mott & Anor v Environment Agency

Compensation for unlawful restriction of fishing rights must be calculated by reference to the actual loss suffered, comparing the permitted catch under the unlawful decision to the average catch in previous unrestricted years, not by hypothesizing a lawful alternative limit. No compensation is due for subsequent years unless their lawfulness is established. Joint claimants' losses may be awarded to one, leaving division to private arrangement.

Parties
First Claimant: Nigel Mott; Second Claimant: David Merrett; Defendant: Environment Agency
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Assessment of Compensation Following Liability Judgment
Outcome
Compensation assessed for First Claimant; permission refused for Second Claimant's separate claim.
Legal Topics
Compensation for Unlawful Administrative Action, Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR, Assessment of Damages, Restitutio in Integrum, Discretionary Remedies Under Human Rights Act
Human Rights Administrative Law Property Law Compensation for Unlawful Administrative Action Article 1 Protocol 1 ECHR Assessment of Damages Restitutio in Integrum Discretionary Remedies Under Human Rights Act

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nigel Mott

First Claimant

David Merrett

Second Claimant

Environment Agency

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Assessment of Compensation Following Liability Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Basis for calculation of compensation for unlawful restriction of fishing rights
  2. 2 Entitlement to compensation for subsequent years not challenged
  3. 3 Assessment of joint claimants' losses

Ratio Decidendi

Compensation for unlawful restriction of fishing rights must be calculated by reference to the actual loss suffered, comparing the permitted catch under the unlawful decision to the average catch in previous unrestricted years, not by hypothesizing a lawful alternative limit. No compensation is due for subsequent years unless their lawfulness is established. Joint claimants' losses may be awarded to one, leaving division to private arrangement.

Court Disposition

Compensation assessed for First Claimant; permission refused for Second Claimant's separate claim.

Orders

  • Compensation of £187,278 plus interest to Mr Mott
  • Permission refused for Mr Merrett's separate claim