Scotch Whisky Association And Others V. The Lord Advocate+the Advocate General For Scotland
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Lord Brodie,Lord Eassie,Lord Menzies |
| Neutral Citation | [2014] CSIH 38 |
| Docket Number | P762/12 |
| Date | 30 April 2014 |
| Court | Court of Session |
| Published date | 29 April 2014 |
| EXTRA DIVISION, INNER HOUSE, COURT OF SESSION | |
| [2014] CSIH 38 | |
| Lord Eassie Lord Menzies Lord Brodie | P762/12 OPINION OF THE COURT delivered by LORD EASSIE in the reclaiming motion in the petition by SCOTCH WHISKY ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS Petitioners and reclaimers; against THE LORD ADVOCATE First Respondent; and THE ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR SCOTLAND Second Respondent: _______________ |
First Respondent: Moynihan QC, Duncan QC; The Scottish Government Legal Directorate
Second Respondent: Carmichael QC, J N M MacGregor; Office of the Advocate General
30 April 2014
[1] This reclaiming motion is brought against the Lord Ordinary's decision rejecting the petitioners' challenge to the provisions of the Alcohol (Minimum Pricing) (Scotland) Act 2012 relating to the minimum unit pricing in retail sales of alcoholic beverages in Scotland and to the related draft order of the Scottish Ministers. Before the Lord Ordinary the petitioners advanced an argument to the effect that the introduction of minimum unit pricing for alcoholic drinks in Scotland would be contrary to the provisions of the Act of Union 1707. That argument is no longer pursued by the petitioners - who comprise, in addition to the Scotch Whisky Federation, EU organisations in the spirit and wine sectors, namely, "CEPS"[1] and "CEEV"[2]. The challenge to minimum unit pricing now proceeds entirely on the basis of European Union Law.
[2] In view of the fact that the issues in the case are now confined to questions of EU law, on 11 October 2013 the court decided that a preliminary hearing should be held on 28 and 29 November 2013 to consider inter alia whether at that stage a reference should be made to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling under article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ("TFEU"). At that hearing, having heard submissions for parties on the matter, we decided on 29 November 2013 that the petitioners' motion for making such a reference to the Court of Justice should be refused at that stage of the proceedings. We indicated however that we were inclined to the view that it was likely that a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union would be called for in due course, but that we considered it important that we first be more fully addressed at the hearing which had been arranged for February 2014 on the relevant EU law and the reclaiming motion more generally.
[3] While at the hearing of the reclaiming motion in February 2014 neither the petitioners nor either of the respondents actively urged the court to make a reference to the Court of Justice in Luxembourg,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Scotch Whisky Association And Others Against The Lord Advocate And The Advocate General
...on 30 April 2014, the court decided to request a preliminary ruling from the CJEU and invited submissions on the form of the reference ([2014] CSIH 38). By interlocutor on 3 July 2014, the court requested a preliminary ruling from the CJEU on six questions. At delivering judgment on 23 Dece......
-
Wightman v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union
...Bank v British Bank for Foreign Trade Ltd [1921] 2 AC 438; 8 Ll L Rep 178; 19 ALR 1101 Scotch Whisky Association v Lord Advocate [2014] CSIH 38; 2014 GWD 17–309 Sinclair Collis Ltd v Lord Advocate [2012] CSIH 80; 2013 SC 221; 2013 SLT 100; 2013 SCLR 49 Toussaint v Attorney-General of St Vin......
-
Reclaiming Motion By Andy Wightman Msp And Others Against Secretary Of State For Exiting The European Union
...troubling the CJEU. Only about ten references have emerged from Scotland in some 45 years (eg Scotch Whisky Association v Lord Advocate [2014] CSIH 38, 2017 SC 465, cf Sinclair Collis v Lord Advocate 2013 SC 221, 2011 SLT 620). It would be disappointing if a rare request for assistance were......
-
Wightman and Others v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union
...troubling the CJEU. Only about ten references have emerged from Scotland in some 45 years (e.g. Scotch Whisky Association v. Lord Advocate[2014] CSIH 38, 2017 SC 465, cf. Sinclair Collis v. Lord Advocate2013 SC 221, 2011 SLT 620). It would be disappointing if a rare request for assistance w......
-
Minimum Alcohol Pricing in Scotch Whisky Association v Lord Advocate
...motion is before the Inner House and a number of questions are to be referred to the CJEU, see Scotch Whisky Association v Lord Advocate [2014] CSIH 38. on the basis that it would be contrary to EU law as a restriction on the free movement of goods. The Scottish Government justified the mea......