High Court finds FSA slaughterhouse charging system unlawful

The High Court has ruled that the Food Standards Agency (FSA) acted unlawfully in the way it charged slaughterhouses for official food safety controls.

The decision was welcomed by meat processors and livestock sector representatives, who have previously raised concerns over the charges.

The judicial review was brought by the Association of Independent Meat Suppliers (Aims) and the British Meat Processors Association (BMPA), with support from the NFU.

See also: FSA small abattoir fee cut proposal divides industry

Under current arrangements, slaughterhouses are legally required to contribute towards the cost of food hygiene and safety inspections carried out by the FSA.

These official controls cost about £64m/year, with industry charges rising by 24% this year.

Unlawful charges

In her judgment, Mrs Justice Dias found that the FSA had included costs in its charging model that were not permitted under legislation.

The court ruled that only costs directly linked to official controls carried out by official veterinarians (OVs) or meat hygiene inspectors (MHIs) could be recovered from industry.

The judge found that management, supervision and governance costs associated with OVs and MHIs should not have been included in charges.

She also ruled that novice official veterinarians and temporarily registered novice official veterinarians were not qualified OVs, meaning their employment costs and time should not have been charged to operators.

The court further found issues with the FSA’s enforcement charging regime, concluding that charges should generally be limited to actions taken to address established non-compliances rather than activities such as drafting advisory letters.

The FSA has accepted that the hourly rates used for official controls and enforcement should be quashed, as well as the data used to calculate those rates.

Further legal arguments will determine the precise terms of the court order, but according to Aims “there will be both future savings for industry and the possibility of reimbursement of previous payments”.

Industry response

Peter Hewson, veterinary director at Aims, said the FSA board had “got it horribly wrong”.

“I have been telling the FSA for many years that they were charging industry unlawfully, but for the past two years they have totally refused to engage saying they had to follow their board’s instruction to focus on reducing the discount,” he said.

BMPA chief executive John Powell said the ruling exposed “long-standing weaknesses” in the FSA’s charging policy and called for a fairer, more transparent system.

“The burden of FSA charges on our industry is significant when we are responsible for ensuring the country is fed, safeguarding food security and upholding the highest standards of food safety and animal welfare,” said Mr Powell.

NFU president Tom Bradshaw added: “Today’s ruling is a hugely significant outcome for the livestock sector and is a brilliant result for the meat industry, the NFU and our members.

“The NFU has long held the view that these charges on abattoirs risk seriously impacting the wider livestock sector.”