Holmes v Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food [2000] EHLR 369 – Regs 20, 21 and scheds 1 and 7 FMHIR – FSA.
1) “provisions” in a statute can include sections, clauses or paragraphs.
- offences where D has the opportunity to raise a due diligence defence are not absolute.
2) no duplicity in situation analogous to charge of theft where items taken are itemised.
3) preparation for a production process to start can properly be regarded as a preliminary stage of production.
4) “waste” is a form of “refuse” and the words are interchangeable.
5) requirement for refuse bin to be kept shut does not include when opened to insert refuse.
6) an impermeable material which may not be wood includes a wood-based material such as cardboard.
7) Court hearing case stated should not enquire into evidence undisclosed therein in court below.
- due diligence defence to be approached on basis of what could reasonably be expected of a business of relevant size.
- not sufficient to put procedures in place; active steps required to ensure procedures properly implemented at all times.
undefined: unpaid