Image from Google Jackets

R v Dairy Produce Quota Tribunal for England and Wales, ex parte Lifely

Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (8827) 9 July 1988, 79-84(4)Publication details: 1988Subject(s): Summary: QBD 11 February 1988. A claim for wholesale milk quota put forward by the applicant on the grounds of exceptional hardship was dismissed by the Dairy Produce Quota Tribunal. The present hearing was the third attempt to establish a a claim to quota. The applicant had no buildings for milking cows on the land of which he was a tenant, but there was an arrangement for the applicant to use milking facilities on land belonging to his father. Under the Dairy Produce Quotas Regulations 1984 , para 17(3)(a), a claimant invoking the exceptional hardship provisions had to establish that he had made an arrangement, the outcome of which was a level of wholesale delivery of dairy produce in respect of which wholesale quota was not otherwise capable under those regulations of being allocated to him. The tribunal decided that the applicant did not satisfy the regulations on the ground that he did not have a legally enforceable right to use the milking parlour. It was held that the tribunal had misd
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report London Journal article ABS39493 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 17150-1001

QBD 11 February 1988. A claim for wholesale milk quota put forward by the applicant on the grounds of exceptional hardship was dismissed by the Dairy Produce Quota Tribunal. The present hearing was the third attempt to establish a a claim to quota. The applicant had no buildings for milking cows on the land of which he was a tenant, but there was an arrangement for the applicant to use milking facilities on land belonging to his father. Under the Dairy Produce Quotas Regulations 1984 , para 17(3)(a), a claimant invoking the exceptional hardship provisions had to establish that he had made an arrangement, the outcome of which was a level of wholesale delivery of dairy produce in respect of which wholesale quota was not otherwise capable under those regulations of being allocated to him. The tribunal decided that the applicant did not satisfy the regulations on the ground that he did not have a legally enforceable right to use the milking parlour. It was held that the tribunal had misd