AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Veal haulier's court bid fails

6th February 1997
Page 15
Page 15, 6th February 1997 — Veal haulier's court bid fails
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

by James Brewster • The police have a duty to protect the vehicles of live animal exporters from demonstrators—but not at any cost, London's Appeal Court has ruled.

Lord Kennedy said that the Chief Constable for Sussex had not abrogated his responsibilities when he cut down on police protection at Shoreham at the height of the protests.

Veal calf exporter International Traders Ferry (ITF) had sued for damages, claiming its trade was entitled to protection five days a week regardless of cost.

But Lord Kennedy said that the Chief Constable faced an impossible situation because the force had finite resources. His decision to restrict protection for ITF's trucks to two days a week was therefore reasonable, added the judge.

Peter Roth, for ITF, said that, although the company had ceased trading because of the European ban on British beef exports, it would be seeking leave to appeal to the House of Lords.

When the protests at Shoreham were at their height more than 1,000 police officers were needed to allow lorries to reach the ferry. By mid-January 1996 the cost of this operation had passed ,C2m and it was estimated that the cost of protecting ITF's trade was £125,000 a week, the court heard.

ITF was ordered to pay legal costs for the action— likely to run into six figures—but the costs order was suspended for a month to enable the company to ask the House of Lords for leave to appeal.


comments powered by Disqus