GEORGE ROBERTSON WEST v. PROCURATOR FISCAL, BANFF

CONTRARY to the Sea Fishing Licensing Order 1992 and the Sea Fish (Conservation) Act 1967, Section 4(3) as amended."

[2] The background to the matter is the common fisheries policy of the European Union as ultimately established by Council Regulation (EEC) No. 3760/92. The establishment of a control system applicable to that policy was effected by Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2847/93. The system has been amended since that date, but that was the Regulation which was in force at the time that the offence in this case was allegedly committed, that is to say, 12 August 1997.

[3] The United Kingdom relevant legislation implementing the policy is initially the Sea Fish (Conservation) Act 1967 and the Sea Fish Licensing Order 1992 (S.I. 2633/92) and the Sea Fishing (Licences and Notices) Regulations 1994 (S.I. 2813/94).

[4] As can be found from the findings in fact in the stated case, the position is that the waters surrounding the United Kingdom have been divided into certain areas under an international division known as ICES. Defence production No. 1, on page 74 of the print, demonstrates those divisions which include an area of the North Sea known as IVa ("NSA") and an area off the west coast of Scotland VIa ("WCA"). The dividing line between those two areas is longitude 4� west, which is a line to the west of Shetland, almost bisecting the northern coast of Scotland ("the meridian line").

[6] As will be observed from the stated case, before the sheriff the only issue that was argued was that of proportionality upon the basis that what was being required of the fishing vessels leaving one area to go to the other, amounted to undue interference with their basic rights to fish which was out of all proportion to the specified aim of the legislation, which was conservation of stocks.