High Court dismisses proceedings brought against the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food arising from compensation allegedly promised to Irish fishermen for the elimination of fishing for tuna by way of drift net methods in 1998, on the grounds that the Minister at the time did not make representations to the plaintiffs sufficient to ground a legitimate expectation that they would receive compensation either from the EU or the Irish State; 2) by lobbying the European Commission to amend the text of the draft Decision so that the Decision as ultimately adopted left it to member states to decide whether or not to adopt a conversion plan, the defendants did not nullify any previously promised compensation; and 3) the claim is statute barred in any event.
Fisheries – ban on drift net fishing for tuna – Council Regulation (EC) No. 1239/98 – the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance – compensation allegedly promised for the elimination of fishing for tuna by way of drift net – Council Decision 1999/27/EC – alleged representations – legitimate expectation – whether the Minister made any representations at all to the plaintiffs that the plaintiffs would receive compensation – whether legitimate expectation applies as a general principle of EU law – claim that defendants have failed to defend and vindicate the rights of the plaintiffs – response of Ireland to proposed Drift Net Ban – state funding of compensation – amendment of draft Decision – plaintiffs’ claim for declaratory relief must be refused – Statute of Limitations plea – s. 71 (1) (b) of the Statute of Limitations Act 1957 – plaintiffs’ claim is statute barred – proceedings dismissed.