header-logo header-logo

Food law: Hard to swallow?

12 August 2020 / Fred Philpott , Slim Dinsdale
Issue: 7899 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Food law
printer mail-detail
25798
Innocent but not allowed to prove it. Slim Dinsdale & Fred Philpott address a statutory fiction in criminal law

In brief

  • In the context of criminal proceedings concerning food law the High Court has held that if legislation deems a state of affairs leading to a conviction the defendant cannot adduce evidence to the contrary.

The case involved use by dates. The legislation stated that if a food product was on sale after the date it was ‘deemed to be unsafe’. There was evidence that the food products were not unsafe (the double negative is appropriate). That was ruled inadmissible and the criminal conviction was upheld.

This cannot be right

To make deeming provisions in criminal law can sometimes be justified. Often the factual situation or intention is known only to the defendant so it is right to deem a certain situation or intention from other facts but permit the defendant to show (rebut) that this situation or intention is not correct. The law which places

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll