Kool Blast Europe Limited v The Environment Agency
[2024] UKFTT 4 (GRC)
John Brett v The Environment Agency
3 April 2024
[2024] UKFTT 281 (GRC)
First-tier Tribunal
A man was fined over £1 million for breaking rules about gases that harm the environment. He argued the fine was wrong, but a court mostly agreed with the government agency that issued the fine. The court said it was important to follow the rules to protect the environment, even if the man had health problems.
Key Facts
- •John Brett appealed 12 penalty notices totaling £1,064,750 issued by the Environment Agency under the Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases Regulations 2015.
- •The appeals concerned breaches of EU Regulation 517/2014, later implemented in GB law, regarding quotas for HFCs and reporting requirements.
- •Brett argued errors in calculating financial gain (including container weight), incorrect culpability assessment (claiming inadvertence), and a false claim of placing a non-refillable container on the market.
- •Brett was unrepresented at the hearing due to health issues, submitting evidence from his GP and a psychiatrist.
- •The Tribunal considered written submissions and evidence, acknowledging Brett's health limitations but proceeding with the case due to significant delays and lack of alternative proposals.
- •The Tribunal had to consider the Environment Agency's Enforcement and Sanctions Policy (ESP) in assessing the penalties.
Legal Principles
The Tribunal can review the Environment Agency's discretion in applying penalties under the Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases Regulations 2015.
Schedule 5, Paragraph 4(2) of the 2015 regulations
Appropriate weight must be given to the Environment Agency's view as the regulator entrusted with administering the scheme.
Hesham Ali v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKSC 60 at [45]
'Unreasonable' in the context of the appeal grounds means unfair, unsound, or excessive, not necessarily in the strict public law sense.
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223
The Tribunal must apply the balance of probabilities standard when determining facts.
Verlander v Devon Waste Management [2007] EWCA Civ 835 , at [18-19]
The Tribunal must take reasonable steps to ensure access to justice, including considering the appellant's vulnerability.
Article 6 ECHR and Tribunal Procedure Rules
Outcomes
Appeal GGE/2022/0044 (regarding a non-refillable container) was allowed.
The Environment Agency failed to provide sufficient evidence that the container was non-refillable, as defined in the regulation.
All other appeals were dismissed.
The Tribunal found the Environment Agency's penalty calculations and culpability assessments to be largely justified, despite Brett's arguments and health challenges. The Tribunal considered the significant financial gain from the breaches and the importance of upholding the environmental regulations.