T A Gwillim and Sons, R (on the application of) v The Welsh Ministers

T A Gwillim and Sons, R (on the application of) v The Welsh Ministers

The decision under challenge was flawed because the interpretation of 'production was adversely affected' was too narrow, failing to consider both land area and livestock numbers as required by the Regulation's purpose and context. The decision should be reconsidered with proper regard to these factors.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: T A Gwillim and Sons; Defendant: The Welsh Ministers
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing
Outcome
Claim allowed; decision quashed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Interpretation of EU Regulations, Single Payment Scheme, Agri Environmental Commitments, Hardship Provisions
Administrative Law European Union Law Agricultural Law Judicial Review Interpretation of EU Regulations Single Payment Scheme Agri Environmental Commitments Hardship Provisions

Source-derived case record

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

T A Gwillim and Sons

Claimant

The Welsh Ministers

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 40(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 requires farmers under agri-environmental commitments to show that production was adversely affected
  2. 2 Whether 'production was adversely affected' encompasses more than a reduction in livestock numbers and includes changes in land area farmed

Ratio Decidendi

The decision under challenge was flawed because the interpretation of 'production was adversely affected' was too narrow, failing to consider both land area and livestock numbers as required by the Regulation's purpose and context. The decision should be reconsidered with proper regard to these factors.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; decision quashed

Orders

  • The decision set out in the letter dated 2 September 2008 is quashed.
  • The decision is to be reconsidered by the Minister in accordance with the judgment.