2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
Speciality Produce Limited appealed against the refusal to award costs for judicial review proceedings that became moot after a successful statutory appeal. The court upheld the initial ruling, emphasizing that obtaining relief through a parallel statutory appeal process did not entitle the appellant to costs in the judicial review.
Judgment
Lord Justice Patten :
This is an appeal by Speciality Produce Limited (“SPL”) against the refusal by Vos J to order the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to pay the costs of judicial review proceedings which SPL brought to challenge a decision of the Rural Payments Agency (“RPA”) to withdraw SPL’s recognition as a Producer Organisation (“PO”) under the Common Agricultural Policy Fruit and Vegetables Aid Scheme. The application for judicial review was due to be heard on 13 November 2012 but was discontinued by consent after the Secretary of State wrote to SPL on 7 November 2012 informing the company that its internal statutory appeal against the decision under review had been successful and that the decision to withdraw recognition would be set aside. In these circumstances both sides correctly recognised that a judge of the Administrative Court would be unwilling to embark upon an application which had become academic. But they remained in disagreement about the appropriate order for costs. SPL said that it had obtained by consent the primary relief sought in the claim for judicial review and should have its costs. The Secretary of State contended that the grounds upon which SPL had been given leave by Mitting J to seek judicial review were quite distinct from the grounds of the statutory appeal on which they had succeeded and that there should be no order for costs in respect of the judicial review proceedings.
Vos J ( [2013] EWHC 2196 (Ch) ) accepted the arguments of the Secretary of State and made no order for costs.
In order to put the arguments in context, it is necessary to begin with a relatively brief summary of the decision under review and the background to the claim for judicial review. A PO is an entity through which a number of growers (in this case fruit and vegetable producers) market their produce. Financial support for their operations is provided by the European Union (“EU”) through the Common Agricultural Policy. Loss of recognition as a PO therefore has serious financial consequences for its grower members. SPL says that its loss of EU funding caused by the withdrawal of recognition amounted to between £1.3m and £1.8m per annum.
The criteria for recognition as a PO are set out in a number of EU Regulations which also provide for recognition to be suspended or withdrawn in certain circumstances. In this particular case, SPL’s loss of recognition was concerned with its use of intermediaries to mark