WHEN a prize bull went under the hammer for £1,400, the scene was set for a High Court test case of vital importance to the meat and farming industries

The bull appeared healthy when it was sold at Darlington Farmers' Auction Mart in September last year.

But, after it was slaughtered, a government vet said there were abscesses in its offal and diagnosed pyaemia, a bovine form of septicaemia.

He refused to give the carcass a health stamp and certified it unfit for human consumption.

The bull's owner, Cleveland Meat Company Limited, was furious when the valuable beast had to be consigned for use in animal by-products.

The Food Standards Agency said the vet's decision was final and told the company there was no right of appeal.

But Cleveland Meat's boss, Michael Broad, who is also director of the farmers market, was not prepared to let the matter lie.

Refusing to accept the vet's decision, he took his own expert veterinary advice and employed a high-powered legal team.

The company took the case all the way to London's High Court, saying that the dispute was of vital importance to farmers and meat producers.

The absence of a right of appeal against the official vet's ruling breached EU rules, argued barrister David Hercock.

And he told the court that it also amounted to a violation of private property rights enshrined in the Human Rights Convention.

However, dismissing the judicial review challenge, Mr Justice Simon ruled that the public interest in food safety had to come first.

European law did not provide for or envisage a right of appeal against the official vet's decision to condemn the bull's carcass.

Measures taken by the agency to ensure only safe meat enters the human food chain were appropriate and in accordance with the law.

Underlining the importance of public confidence in meat production, he said the rules struck "an appropriate balance" between the interests of meat suppliers and consumers.