Association of Independent Meat Suppliers, R (on the application of) v Food Standards Agency

Charges for official controls may recover only costs authorised by the domestic charging legislation. Overheads are recoverable only where they are incurred by an inspector in exercising controls, or are inextricably linked to that exercise, and genuinely relate to a specified statutory cost category. Costs merely facilitating the overall regulatory system are insufficient.

Persons who have not completed the required probationary period, or who lack the required registration, cannot be treated as official veterinarians for charging purposes. Enforcement charges must distinguish official controls from other enforcement activity. A charging authority must provide enough information to show how the rates were calculated and whether the included costs are lawfully recoverable.

The claimant, a trade association representing the meat industry, challenged charges levied by the Food Standards Agency for official controls and enforcement activities at slaughterhouses for 2025/26.

The challenge concerned the inclusion of overheads and the costs of novice and temporarily registered official veterinarians in the Main Rate; the structure and contents of the Enforcement Rate; and the adequacy of the information supplied in the Cost Data Slides.

The court considered the interaction between the Meat (Official Controls Charges) (England) Regulations 2009, the Official Controls Regulation, the Qualifications Regulation and the Fees Regulations.

1. Ground 1 succeeded. The power to charge derived from the Meat (Official Controls Charges) (England) Regulations 2009, particularly paragraph 11 of Schedule 2, rather than directly from Article 81 of the OCR. The relevant costs had to be incurred by an inspector in exercising controls, or be inextricably linked to that exercise, and genuinely relate to one of the specified Article 81 heads. The amendments to Article 81 did not amend the domestic charging regulations and did not authorise the wider recovery contended for by the FSA.
2. The inextricable-link question was fact-sensitive. A useful threshold question was whether the official control could be performed without the activity. Internal audit, quality control, performance management, governance, supervision of inspectors, parliamentary questions, complaints handling and comparable corporate or operational assurance costs fell outside the permissible charge.
3. The qualifications challenge also succeeded. Article 13 of the Qualifications Regulation, read with Chapter I of Annex II, required completion of the practical probationary period before a veterinarian became an official veterinarian. Passing the prescribed test was necessary but not sufficient. Accordingly, the FSA could not include the costs of NOVs or TRNOVs in the cost base or charge for their hours. The question of remote supervision did not arise.
4. Ground 2 succeeded in part. Article 79(2)(c) permitted recovery for specified unplanned official controls following detected non-compliance, but not for enforcement activity generally. Article 138(4) was capable of authorising recovery of expenditure incurred under Article 138. There could be no overlap between Article 138 enforcement measures and official controls under Article 79(2)(c). Written advice was not recoverable unless it constituted written notification of a decision concerning an Article 138 action or measure.
5. The FSA was not entitled to apply an undifferentiated Enforcement Rate to enforcement official controls and other enforcement activities, or to include the same unlawful indirect costs in both rates.
6. Ground 3 succeeded. The transparency obligation required sufficient information to enable a reasonably astute reader to understand how the hourly rates were calculated and whether the costs fell within the statutory tests. The Cost Data Slides did not permit the unlawful components to be separated. The Main Rate, Enforcement Rate and relevant Cost Data Slides were therefore quashed. The court reserved the precise form of order and costs.