Environmental Agency -v- F & H Contracts Ltd. April 2001 This concerned alleged pollution of a lake and stream at Buscott, Oxon. EA claimed that F & H contracts caused pollution by discharging trade effluent into a watercourse in the act of digging out a ditch. OAC acted for the defendants. The defendants pleaded guilty to the charge of allowing polluting matter to enter a watercourse but not to discharging a trade effluent. A reduced fine of £7000 from £20,000 was made against F & H Contracts Ltd., with 14 months to pay. Rex -v- United Agricultural Products Ltd. December 2000 U.A.P. with others were accused of illegally marketing isoproturon herbicide that was not approved for use in the United Kingdom. OAC acted for the defence. The case arose from the suppliers of the product to U.A.P. who had knowledge that the approval had lapsed. U.A.P pleaded guilty to four charges of storing a pesticide without approval and one of supplying an unapproved pesticide. They were fined £12,500 plus costs. The suppliers were also found guilty and fined. P.S. Elliott -v- Agrevo UK Ltd. 2000 The case concerned collapse of a PYO fruit business due to alleged ground pollution by Agrevo UK Ltd. OAC acted for the defendants. The case mainly concerned the problems encountered by the plaintiffs trying to grow alpine strawberries. The failures of the crop were considered by our side to be due Phytopthora fragariae and not to pesticides. The case was heard in the High Court, London. Judgement was given in favour of defendant. Mr & Mrs Peake -v- MAFF, 1999 The case consisted of a claim from Peake that his PYO strawberry crop was damaged as a result of negligent advice from MAFF. OAC acted for the plaintiff. Case settled November 1999 in favour of plaintiff. Wareing -v- Rhodia Eco Services Ltd and Others, 1998 The case was one of alleged pollution damage to the farm of Mr Wareing. I acted as a herbicide/agronomist witness. A well known herbicide – diuron -was the main cause of damage on the farm. OAC acted for the plaintiff. The case was settled by an offer from the defendants. Phytorus S.A. -v- Chiltern Farm Chemicals Ltd. 1998 This case concerned the "Passing-off" of a pesticide in contravention of current regulations. There was also a counter-claim against Phytorus S.A. OAC acted for the defendant. A settlement was agreed between the parties. J. D’Amario -v- Fargro Ltd and CibaGeigy, 1998 Mr D’Amario was a glasshouse grower specialising in salad crops. He followed advice that led to long term pollution of his glasshouse soil. The case was settled on an offer from the defendants. OAC acted for the plaintiff. Premier Crops Ltd -v- Robert Brown’s Farms Ltd. 1997 This was a claim against RBF Ltd for failure to pay bills for agro-chemicals supplied to RBF Ltd by Premier Crops Ltd. RBF Ltd counter-claimed that the agronomy advice given to them by Premier Crops had caused damage which led to loss of yield and income. The case was settled by an offer from RBF Ltd. OAC acted for the plaintiff. Vernon -v- Morris, 1996 Vernon was a beef/sheep farmer. Morris was a contractor and at Vernon’s request sprayed his grass. There was consequential damage to his grass which led to a claim for loss against Morris. The case was eventually dropped. OAC acted for Morris. Brinkmans -v- Fine Agrochemicals Ltd and Mirfield Sales and Services Ltd. 1996 FA contracted MSS to mix a plant regulator and fill into 1000g jars as a powder. Most was exported to Holland. It’s use led to severe crop damage on many holdings. The product was found to contain unacceptable levels of herbicides as contaminants. The case hinged on the fact that the plaintiffs were aware of the presence of the contaminants and that the contaminants did not normally caused damage to treated crops. The case was not proven. OAC acted for the defendants.