Kaye v Robertson— a reply

TLDR: In this article, the Spanish vessel owners would be compensated for loss if refused registration and the UK government or its Elshing communities or vessel owners could be compensated either by the Spanish government or by Spanish fishing vessels or by the Commission for the loss that arises from the interim injunction or the fishing by Spanish against the UK quota.

Abstract: pending a decision on the substantive issue; the Spanish vessel owners would be compensated for loss if refused registration. If legislation provided UK fishing vessel owners and others who suffer from the unlawful taking of fish in breach of the common fisheries policy with compensation from the owners of the vessels concerned then their interests too would be protected. Instead, under the law as it stands, the local fishing industries of member states, which the quota system is supposed to protect, suffer the loss. In Community law the position seems to be extremely complex and no attempt will be made here to deal with it. That would make another article. But if, as seems likely, there is no right for the UK government or its Elshing communities or vessel owners to be compensated either by the Spanish government, or by the Spanish fishing vessels, or by the Commission for the loss that arises from the interim injunction or the fishing by the Spanish against the UK quota, the common fisheries policy looks pretty empty. Quite apart from any compensation point if the Spanish vessel owners win, they will have driven a coach and horses through this, and indeed any, quota system and this must raise issues as to how fish stocks can be effectively conserved and fishing communities protected at the same time.