The UFU has been determined from the outset to achieve a satisfactory outcome for the many farmers who were harshly penalized because they un-intentionally claimed Single Farm Payment on the same land as their landlords.
In the High Court this week the Union's determination on this issue was vindicated when Justice Weatherup ruled that "there are grounds for concluding that (applicants who had a verbal agreement with their Landlord or Landlord's Agent) were not at fault".
The cases of two of the farmers who the Union used as test cases have now been returned to the External Panels for their case to be re-considered, based on the Judges interpretation of events. The UFU believes that this will pave the way for other farmers in a similar position to have their cases re-examined.
UFU President Graham Furey said; "This Judicial Review outcome now gives us a clear way forward for farmers who had a verbal agreement with their Landlord or Landlord's Agent. The Judge has looked at the cases of two of our members and has quashed the previous rulings by Appeals Panels that their penalties should be upheld. These farmers cases will now be re-considered by the Panel and the Judge has given a clear indication that they were 'not at fault' and therefore penalties should not apply. It will be very important that the Appeals Panels are made fully aware of the details of this weeks ruling. The UFU has been highlighting the 'not at fault' issue since February 2006 when we discussed the matter with the EU Commission and our consistent position has now been vindicated".
Graham Furey added; "We have taken a determined stand on this issue, which cost the farming industry several million pounds in penalties. We will not stand by and allow farmers to be harshly penalized without challenging the circumstances; in this instance through the Courts. We would now call on DARD to respond positively to this ruling and make every effort to assist farmers".
It is disappointing that farmers who had penalties imposed because of errors involving form fillers, or who had assumed their Landlord would not submit a claim, are not included in this weeks positive Court ruling.
The UFU says it will in due course be advising its members who were affected by duplicate field penalties on the best steps to take to have their penalties reviewed.