You are not currently signed in - enter your email address and password into the boxes below, or create a new account.

R (Highbury Poultry Farm Produce Ltd) v Crown Prosecution Service [2020] UKSC 39 - S 111 MCA - articles 3(1) and 15(1) and Annex lll, point 3.2 PATKR – reg 30(1)(g) WATKER.

1) where domestic legislation implements EU regulations the former must be interpreted in accordance with EU principles.
- hence, if PATKR did not require proof of mens rea then neither could WATKER.
2) teleological approach to interpretation of EU legislation requires interpretation of words fulfil purpose of the legislation and of EU.
3) that the offences under articles 3(1) and 15(1) PATKR were of strict liability apparent from use of words such as “shall” and “ensure”.
- use of passive voice leaves no obvious room for requirement of intention or negligence.
4) where clear substantive provision imposes strict liability, ambiguous recital does not contradict it.
- the unclear recital (2) does not override the clear article 3(1).

undefined: unpaid

Legislation