Convictions quashed
The NFU welcomed a decision by the High Court to quash the convictions of a farmer and haulier who were prosecuted by Trading Standards for permitting unnecessary suffering to sheep, permitting unfit sheep to be exposed to sale in 2004 and for transporting sheep not fit for the intended journey. Both members categorically denied causing any unnecessary suffering to the animals and pleaded not guilty to the charges.
The High Court found that Trading Standards officers were in breach of their duty to preserve material evidence that may be relevant to an investigation. The court ruled the men were severely handicapped in mounting a challenge to the evidence given by the Defra vet and a fair trial was therefore not possible. Both had their convictions quashed.
Following the decision, the farmer involved said: "This case has been rumbling on for the last three years and has put tremendous pressure on us and our businesses. It has really been the NFU, through its Legal Assistance Scheme, that has stood by us during these difficult times, and we are very appreciative of the support."
The haulier added: "Given the high legal costs in such actions, we could not have proceeded with the High Court appeal without the financial backing of the LAS. It's definitely worth subscribing to."
The members were advised by one of the NFU Legal Panel Firms with total legal costs in excess of £40,000. The LAS contributed a significant percentage towards these costs and the members were able to recover 87% of these costs from Central Funds, some of this reverting to the Scheme to support others.
The NFU hopes that this case will improve the way evidence in transport and welfare cases is dealt with.
Mediation aids inter member dispute
The NFU Legal Assistance Scheme has recently seen the successful resolution of an Inter-Member Dispute. The cases involved two members whose issues could have led to protracted legal proceedings at great cost to one or both parties.
Under the NFU Inter Member Disputes Procedure, the Legal Assistance Scheme offered, arranged and paid for mediation. The mediation took place and resolved the issues between the members in hours. The result has been positive for both parties and has now been legally formalized thereby bringing a swift and final outcome for all involved.'
Alpacas attacked
Another successful case involved a member who was claiming compensation for the loss of five pedigree alpacas following an attack by two Siberian husky dogs.
The police looked to prosecute the dog owner, however due to a technical loophole, were unable to do so (due to alpacas not coming within the definitions of livestock for the purposes of the Animals Act 1971). The matter was settled whereupon the member was awarded over £23,000 in compensation plus a contribution towards the legal costs. The LAS significantly supported this member which resulted in a successful outcome.
Seeds lead to settlement
In another case, a member was claiming damages from a Seed company in respect of defective sunflower seeds.
With guidance and support from the LAS, the member proceeded to mediation where a settlement was reached between all parties concerned. The Scheme contributed significant support towards the members' costs and also assisted in clarifying issues pertaining to the solicitor's costs.
Tenant purchases land
A member had a tenancy dispute, pertaining to land he had occupied for some 40 years.
Problems arose following the death of the landlord whereupon the executors acting for the estate refused to accept further rent for the land and had in fact sold the estate on to third parties who disputed the members' tenancy.
After lengthy negotiations, an agreement was reached to purchase the land. The Scheme assisted the member with their legal costs in achieving this outcome.
Right of way justified
A member was in dispute with a Development Company concerning the loss of their private right of way following a new housing development on a neighbouring area of land. The company went on to pursue a further planning application believing that the member had abandoned their right of way.
After somewhat lengthy and protracted negotiations, a settlement was reached whereupon the member accepted an alternative right of way and was reasonably compensated. Again, the Scheme contributed substantially in supporting the member with his legal costs in reaching this settlement.
Green Belt victory
A family-run salads farm on the fringes of London's Green Belt won its appeal to build a new packhouse, with help from the NFU regional office and the Legal Assistance Scheme. The decision marks the end of six years of wrangling with the local authority, the London Borough of Bromley, following complaints from vociferous neighbours.
The inquiry heard that the members' proposal for a packhouse on the edge of the Green Belt was not an expansion of the business but a rationalisation to bring all its activities under one roof. The proposed new facilities will allow the farm to become more efficient and to improve working conditions for employees. The business farm was established 60 years ago and its employees are largely drawn from the community.
The planning inspector noted that 'the farm is sensitively managed, contributing positively to the visual qualities of this part of the Green Belt. The planned new facilities will bring about considerable improvements in the working environment for the farm's employees, said the inspector. He also recognised that a new packhouse 'would also help to secure the long term future of the enterprise and the substantial level of employment it provides to its local workforce'.
The inspector agreed that the proposed new building, although taller than existing ones, would improve the look of the site as it would result in the removal of unattractive structures. He granted permission but decreed that no development should take place without the prior approval of the local authority on construction materials, hard and soft landscaping. Measures to screen the boundaries of the new development must also be agreed with the London Borough of Bromley.
Vociferous residents had complained about lorry movements to and from the site. The inspector took up the members' to limit lorry movements by implementing a condition to prevent the movement of HGVs before 0500hrs or after 2300hrs on any day. But the inspector acknowledged that the proposed packhouse would not add to the amount of traffic.
The Farm Manager emphasised that both he and the farming family had suffered unnecessary stress during the six year battle. He said: "Due to the length of the case we have not been able to develop and become more efficient to keep up with the demands of the modern-day customer.
"We have been constantly amazed by what appeared to be a complete lack of understanding by the Bromley planning committee. It constantly went against the advice to grant permission given by its agricultural consultants, the Mayor of London's office and its own planning officers."
"On behalf of Mike and Avril Gray, and myself, I would like to thank the NFU and everyone, both locally and nationally, who supported us. This is a great result for a great British farming business," added Mr Cottingham.
NFU South East Environment and Land Use Adviser John Archer said: "The NFU has constantly pressed for the application of the planning system to keep pace with the business pressures forced upon farmers by rapid changes in the structure of the food supply chain. The Inspector's decision in this case is an example of the imaginative and practical approach that we need in future."
Counterclaim pays off
An animal feed company commenced court proceedings against an NFU member to recover their unpaid sums under invoices rendered for feed supplied to the member for his dairy herd.
The member made a counterclaim on the basis that the animal feed and the nutritional advice provided by the company was defective thereby causing various consequential losses. The case proceeded to trial in late 2005. Although the feed company was successful to the extent that it was awarded most of the sum it had claimed, the member was also successful in respect of his counterclaim.
Further, the value of the counterclaim far exceeded the value of the original claim. The member, who received substantial financial support from the Scheme is hoping to recover most of his legal costs from the feed company (total costs incurred were in excess of £92,000), following a Costs Order being awarded by the judge.
No comments have been made.