Skipaway Ltd v Environment Agency [2006] EWHC 983 (Admin) - S 33(6) EPA - s 101 MCA - article 6 ECHR - s 28A SCA.
1) on appeal by case stated, parties may not refer to evidence not set out in the case.
- meaning of words in written instrument to be construed in context of whole document.
2) A remote possibility does not constitute reasonable doubt.
- waste containing a significant amount of controlled waste was controlled waste.
3) criminal trial not a tactical game.
- s 101 MCA - burden on D to prove “exception, exemption, proviso, excuse or qualification” where D could prove it but P could not.
4) waste is “stored” even if it is the subject of processing.
5) no breach of Article 6 ECHR where the unfairness can be remedied on appeal.
undefined: unpaid
Related case digests
- Hughes v DPP [2003] EWCH 2470 - S 1 WCA.
1) implied evidence - inference. 2) judicial notice - magistrates should use common sense, local and general knowledge. 3) reopening of P's case - rebuttal evidence - ambush - criminal proceedings not a game 4) burden of proof on D in statutory defence was compatible with article 6(2) ECHR - when facts of defence within D's knowledge, but not P's. - Powys County Council v David Halsall International Limited [2006] EWHC 613 (Admin) – Ss 12 and 40 CPA – r 81 MCR.
1) unless a question in case stated was whether there was evidence to found the justice’s decision, it “shall not contain a statement of evidence”. - High Court bound to answer the question as posed by the magistrates. 2) if case stated deficient, appellant should promptly seek amendment.