Judicial review: R v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries & Food and Another ex parte Monsanto plc (31 July 1998) Queen's Bench Division

Although not a case relating to the environment this case is of interest as the Queen's Bench Divisional Court gave guidance in its judgement on how principles relating to injunctions can be applied to judicial review applications for interim relief. Monsanto plc had been granted leave to apply for judicial review of the way in which the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries & Food granted approvals pursuant to Part III of the Food & Environmental Protection Act 1985 and the Control of Pesticides Act 1986. Monsanto plc's case was that in granting approvals in reliance to old data the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries & Food was acting in breach of Article 4(1)(b) of Directive 91/414/EEC. These judicial review proceedings were stayed and questions on the correct interpretation of Article 4(1)(b) of Directive 91/414/EEC were referred to the European Court of Justice. Monsanto plc was also subsequently granted leave to apply for judicial review challenging the grant of an approval to Clayton Plant Protection Limited. It was agreed that these proceedings should be stayed pending the decision of the European Court of Justice on the interpretation of Directive 91/414/EEC and the question arose as to whether Monsanto plc should be granted interim relief in the form of a stay of the approval granted to Clayton Plant Protection Limited.

It was common ground that the principles in American Cyanamid v Ethicon Limited [1995] AC 396 relating to the granting of injunctions should be applied. These principles are that: the plaintiff must establish that he has a good arguable claim; the court must not attempt to decide the claim on the affidavit, it is enough if the plaintiff shows that there is a serious question to be tried; if the plaintiff satisfies those tests, the grant or refusal of an injunction is a matter for the exercise of the court's discretion on the balance of convenience. The court held that although the principles were to be applied in the present case this had to be done in the context of the public law issuing question. The court went on to apply the principles to the present case and proceeded to refuse the application for interim relief by Monsanto plc. (Times Law Reports, 12 October 1998)