|
Short
title |
Bell / Gale /
White v AFMA |
|
|
Parties |
(1) Bell
(2) Gale
(3) White |
|
| v |
|
|
Australian
Fisheries Management Authority |
|
|
Forum |
Administrative Appeals Tribunal |
|
|
Date |
28 February 2005 |
|
|
Reported |
(1) [2005] AATA 173
(2) [2005] AATA 172
(3) [2005] AATA 174 |
|
|
Casenote |
Briefly
Noted
IFLPR 2(2) |
|
|
Abstract |
|
|
Three appeals, heard simultaneously, before the
Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal against decisions of
the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) on
allocations of quota in the southern shark fishery. All three
applicants claimed that during the historical reference period
used to calculate quotas, “exceptional circumstances” had existed
(in all cases illness, combined with other factors) which
prevented fishing and therefore resulted in lower catches.
According, it was claimed that these circumstances should have
been taken into account when determining their quotas (and higher
quotas awarded). The Tribunal agreed that AFMA should take account
of “exceptional circumstances” but decided that such circumstances
existed, to the detriment of fishing activity, in only two of the
applications.
|
|
| |
Bibliographic references |
|
| |
- |
|
|
|
