Surayanda v The Welsh Ministers

Surayanda v The Welsh Ministers

The Minister's decision to order the slaughter of Shambo was a justified and proportionate interference with the Community's Article 9 rights, given the serious public and animal health risks posed by bovine TB, the high incidence in the region, and the necessity of the slaughter policy to eliminate risk and obtain post-mortem data. The Minister lawfully exercised discretion, gave due weight to the Community's religious beliefs, and was entitled to conclude that less intrusive measures were insufficient. The appeal was allowed and the High Court's order quashing the slaughter notice was set aside.

Parties
Respondent: Surayanda; Appellants: The Welsh Ministers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment in Judicial Review
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order quashing slaughter notice set aside.
Legal Topics
Article 9 ECHR (freedom of Religion), Judicial Review, Proportionality, Public Health, Animal Disease Control
Administrative Law Human Rights Law Animal Health Law Article 9 ECHR (freedom of Religion) Judicial Review Proportionality Public Health Animal Disease Control

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Surayanda

Respondent

The Welsh Ministers

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment in Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the decision to order the slaughter of the bullock Shambo infringed the Community's Article 9 ECHR rights to manifest religious belief
  2. 2 Whether the interference was justified and proportionate under Article 9(2) ECHR
  3. 3 Whether the Minister lawfully exercised discretion under the Animal Health Act 1981

Ratio Decidendi

The Minister's decision to order the slaughter of Shambo was a justified and proportionate interference with the Community's Article 9 rights, given the serious public and animal health risks posed by bovine TB, the high incidence in the region, and the necessity of the slaughter policy to eliminate risk and obtain post-mortem data. The Minister lawfully exercised discretion, gave due weight to the Community's religious beliefs, and was entitled to conclude that less intrusive measures were insufficient. The appeal was allowed and the High Court's order quashing the slaughter notice was set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order quashing slaughter notice set aside.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The orders quashing the slaughter notice and confirmation letter are set aside.