A legal dispute over a bull deemed unfit for human consumption has been referred to the European Court of Justice by judges in the UK Supreme Court.

The long-running court case involves the Association of Independent Meat Suppliers (AIMS) and Cleveland Meat Company against the Food Standards Agency (FSA), and relates to the purchase of a bull for £1,361 at Darlington Mart in 2014.

The bull was initially passed as fit for slaughter by the official veterinarian (OV) on entry to the abattoir, but a post-mortem inspection by a meat hygiene inspector identified three abbcesses in the offal. Later that day, the OV declared the meat unfit for human consumption.

Cleveland Meat Company, which ceased trading in 2017, challenged that decision, and argued that it should have a right of appeal. The company cited section 9 of the Food Safety Act 1990 which suggests that, in the event of a dispute, the carcase should have been shown to a Justice of the Peace to ultimately determine whether it is condemned or not.

The FSA said that it was not necessary for it to use this procedure, and served the company with a notice for disposal of the carcase.

AIMS and Cleveland Meat Company took the case to the High Court and subsequently to the Court of Appeal, arguing that there should be the means to challenge decisions of an OV. However, on both occasions the stance of the FSA was upheld.

Last week, Supreme Court judges decided that they could only make a determination once the view is sought of the EU Court of Justice. Specifically, they have asked whether the relevant EU law allows for a right of appeal to a decision by an OV.

Read more

Animal rights activists - where do farmers stand legally?

Farmer sues contractor after hand trapped in combine harvester