Day 105 - 16 Mar 95 - Page 62
1
2 Q. That leads me to the next part.
3
4 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Does that mean that it is still not against
5 the law not to have condemned and detained room chill?
6 A. If the authority, and it would be MAFF in this case
7 because they are the actual licensing authority, if they
8 allowed an abattoir operator as part of his work plan to
9 complete his refrigeration by, say, the end of 1995, to
10 that extent it would not be a statutory requirement if the
11 derogation has been given.
12
13 Q. But the regulation still does not say absolutely as of now
14 all condemned and detained rooms should be chilled?
15 A. The regulation says it. I am sure this is the right
16 way round to put it. It is clear in the regulation but
17 there is a supervening regulation which allows derogation
18 of certain structural ----
19
20 Q. Yes, very well.
21
22 MS. STEEL: Before we carry on, I just wanted to clarify
23 something which the witness was saying, as far as
24 I recollect, something about "a split when a requirement
25 between the EC and domestic", and Mr. Rampton did not let
26 him finish the answer, and said: "One lot came in October
27 1992; and the other lot in January 1993". But, in fact,
28 earlier on Mr. Bennett said that the EC Directive, "it had
29 been an EEC licensing requirement since 1987".
30
31 MR. JUSTICE BELL: These are matters of law, so anything which
32 any witness says may or may not be right, it must be
33 capable of ascertainment. I can see you might have a
34 directive, within a reasonable period of time national
35 government has to bring that in. What they will do is pass
36 an Act of Parliament which gives the power to make
37 regulations. There may already be one. Your regulations
38 are made. They have a time when they come into effect and
39 you are saying, with no disrespect, Mr. Bennett, rightly or
40 wrongly, you may have regulations which postpone the coming
41 in to a date which has previously been imposed?
42 A. Yes.
43
44 Q. All this leaves me at the moment not knowing whether it is
45 required at the moment by the legislation or not, but that
46 is a matter of law to be ascertained from the appropriate
47 provisions rather than the witness box, is it not?
48
49 MS. STEEL: He did actually say "it had been a licensing
50 requirement since certainly since 1987".
51
52 MR. JUSTICE BELL: My point is, it does not matter -- let us
53 hope Mr. Bennett gets it right -- but these are matters
54 which must be ascertained from the provisions themselves
55 rather than from a witness in the witness box.
56
57 MS. STEEL: That is fine but Mr. Rampton is getting them from
58 the witness in the witness box and it contradicts his
59 earlier answer.
60
