BYE PIE


Bad news for litigation-lovers. Northern Foods (of the not quite Melton Mowbray pork pie fame) has dropped its appeal against the decision in its unsuccessful judicial review of DEFRA’s definition of the zone from which ‘genuine’ Melton Mowbray pies can come. Northern Foods had claimed that the zone had been artificially enlarged to include a company dominant in the Melton Mowbray Pork Pie Association, but at the same time had been drawn up in a way which excluded other companies.

Northern Food’s decision follows an assurance from DEFRA that, if the European Commission does recognise Melton Mowbray as a PGI, companies will be given 5 years to transfer production in the designated zone.

Northern Foods will also withdraw from the ECJ reference made in March of this year.

The IPKat (not a pork pie consumer himself) can understand why Northern Foods would want to avoid further costly litigation, but there’s an air of unfinished business about the whole thing. Northern Food’s case amounts to a claim that the UK Government was (perhaps unwittingly) prepared to go forward with an application to the Commission for a false zone, in order to protect the business interests of a favoured group of traders. This is a claim of a degree of seriousness that exceeds the facts of this individual case.
BYE PIE BYE PIE Reviewed by Anonymous on Saturday, November 11, 2006 Rating: 5

1 comment:

  1. It's not surprising, though, when you appreciate that Northern Foods has its pies division up for sale and results to deliver on Tuesday. Today's Sunday Times also reports they are expecting a bid in by Wednesday and no-one wants to buy litigation.

    ReplyDelete

All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html

Powered by Blogger.