Defra in court over legality of fishing quotas
11th March 2025
A legal challenge by the NGO Blue Marine Foundation, questioning the legality of quotas set and agreed by the Defra secretary of state, reached the High Court last week. The judgement could have far- reaching consequences for setting of TACs in future years.
Blue Marine told the court that TACs agreed by the UK with the EU and others in 2023, for the 2024 quota year, were illegal under the 2020 Fisheries Act, as they ignored the objectives outlined in the act. They argued further that the lack of transparency in how quota decisions was made was also contrary to the provisions of the act.
Blue Marine is not asking the judge to overturn the 2024 UK quotas, or for restitution of some sort in 2025. Instead, the legal action is targeted at ‘ensuring that a lawful approach is taken in the future’.
Although the main legal discussions centered around sustainable levels of quota, particularly for stocks where ICES had issued zero TAC advice for 2024, several inshore fishermen attended the hearing in support of the action, arguing that mismanagement of stocks was having unfair impacts on the inshore fleet.
Jerry Percy, who at the time the application was made was still leading NUTFA, submitted a statement in support of the court action. Part of his written evidence said: “As a result of successive UK governments consistently determining fishing opportunities above scientific advice, many fish stocks have declined dramatically… by early 2024, under-10m fishermen from around the coast were almost exclusively reporting to me that the lack of fish was putting their livelihoods at risk.”
In his argument, the barrister representing Blue Marine ran through the eight objectives of the Fisheries Act, which include sustainability and scientific evidence. These objectives, he argued, were ignored during the process of setting 2024 TACs. It also ignored objectives about equal access to the resources, he said.
The hearing heard details about TACs that were issued for 2024 above advice given by ICES scientists, with particular focus on zero TAC recommendations where bycatch quotas were set in order to allow mixed fisheries to continue.
Having heard the arguments from both sides, much of the interest and secondary questioning from the judge, Mrs Justice Lang, centered around the detail of the ICES zero catch advice.
Defra argued that ICES advice included multi-annual plans, which meant there was no one TAC recommended for 2024 – rather that the UK minister had quite lawfully chosen a longer recovery period for particular stocks, taking into account other priorities outlined in the act, such as maintaining a viable fishing industry.
Defra lawyers also argued that the ‘shared endeavour’ of fishing in waters where stocks were found in both EU and UK waters meant that strict application of the principles outlined in the Joint Fisheries Statement (JFS) was not possible.
They also told the judge that the ‘overall outcome of negotiations with the EU and others was broadly consistent with requirements on the minister under the act and the JFS’.
Speaking outside the court, Charles Clover, the founder of Blue Marine, said: “By continuing to allow exploitation above sustainable limits for so many species, the government is not only putting fish populations at risk, but everything else that relies on them, including marine ecosystems and the fishing industry itself.”
Mike Cohen, chief executive of the NFFO, told FN ahead of the hearing: “From what I have seen of this case, it largely ignores the nature and purpose of what ICES provides.
“ICES scientists use the best available evidence to advise on a range of scenarios for each stock. Cherry-picking one particular scenario misses the whole point of this system. Fisheries managers are supposed to have the freedom to use the different scenarios to inform their management decisions.
“Alongside environmental considerations, the Fisheries Act says that managers must take account of social, economic and food production needs, and none of these is supposed to have more weight than the others. Managers need to have the freedom to set TACs that will rebuild stocks to higher levels over longer timescales, so that they can also meet those other goals.”
The case closed with written submissions last Friday.
The FN editor is no lawyer, and penetrating some of the legalese used in court was very hard. Neither do I have the dedication to plough through all 700 pages of written evidence put in front of the judge. In footballing terms, however, I would suggest that with 10 minutes to the final whistle, Blue Marine was leading Defra by a goal to nil, and keeping possession of the ball.
The referee is expected to blow her whistle and announce the result as early as this week.
‘How else can the small-boat sector influence Defra?’
wo inshore voices present at the hearing – Jerry Percy, who supplied a written statement to the court in 2024 as director of NUTFA, and Channel fisherman Martin Yowarth – explained to FN why they were supporting the action by Blue Marine.
Jerry Percy said: “I’m hoping that this case will shine a light on Defra’s failure to manage our fisheries resources, including how they allocate fishing opportunities. All the inshore fleet wants is fairness. Ten years ago, the majority of calls I was receiving at NUTFA were about lack of quota – now, after years of mismanagement, the calls are about no fish. I am still getting calls about this now, months after NUTFA was wound up.
“Sadly, this is the case even in the small ports in the South West that are the last bastion of the inshore fleet in England.
I had a small-boat owner just this week saying that increased effort from larger vessels means his crab fishery has all but disappeared.”
Martin Yowarth, who has switched ports in a bid to find catches that will keep his two vessels viable, and is currently operating from Newhaven, said: “Every time a new fishery emerges, it becomes a fight
by some to be the biggest and most destructive, whether this is pulse fishing, fly-shooting, or industrialising the whelk fishery with 3,000 pots a boat. By letting this happen, Defra is abandoning the long-term interest of small-scale fishing communities.
“It’s a prime example of industrial fishing destroying entire fishing communities, when with more effective management, the stocks would be there to support everyone. In the South East of England now, vessel numbers have crashed to the point that Defra considers us to be inconsequential.”
Jerry Percy added: “We are being criticised by some in the fishing industry for working with NGOs such as Blue Marine, but we are at our wits’ end about how else we can influence Defra. If we don’t see change, and soon, it really will call time on the small-boat fleet in England.”
