Stage 2 Appeal Outcomes

February 2013

The Committee heard an appeal against the imposition of penalties following the removal of a hedge during the non-cutting period. The Committee recommended that that the penalties be reduced but that reinstatement conditions remain in place. The Minister upheld the recommendations.

October 2012:

The Committee heard an appeal against an unsuccessful application to the National Reserve. The Committee recommended that the application to the National Reserve be rejected on the grounds that insufficient evidence had been presented to demonstrate that the application met the criteria of the scheme. The Minister upheld the recommendations.

March 2012:

The Committee heard an appeal against the imposition of penalties following the use of a chemical pesticide on a crop for which it was not approved. The Committee recommended that the penalty be reduced. The Minister upheld the recommendations.

November 2011:

The Committee heard an appeal against the imposition of land eligibility penalties following a cross compliance inspection in connection with the CCS Scheme 2009 (Amendment 2010).

The Committee recommended that the appeal be upheld and the land classification of one field be reassessed. The Minister upheld the recommendations.

The field has subsequently been reclassified as AML and due to the height of gorse is ineligible for payment. Payment calculations have been finalised following rebasing. The application of land eligibility penalties have been confirmed as consistent between Years 1 and 2. The consolidated scheme is available on the web: http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/daff/CCS/ccsconsolidatedversion.pdf Following a review, future editions of the Handbook will be available to download from the web to ensure that the latest information is available.

November 2011:

The Committee heard an appeal, which gave rise to financial implications following an error made by a claimant on the application form.

The Committee recommended that the wording on the Error Correction form, what it can be used for, what will be changed by its submission and the dates during which it will be accepted, be reviewed and addressed for the 2012 scheme year.

The Committee also recommended that the Farmer’s Handbook be amended to ensure clarity. It was noted that the onus remains on claimants to submit the correct information to the Department. The Committee found in favour of the appellant, and the Minister upheld the recommendations which have been duly actioned.

November 2011:

The Committee heard an appeal against the imposition of penalties following the removal of gorse and hedging during the non-cutting period.

The Committee recommended that that the penalties be reduced but that reinstatement conditions remain in place. The Minister upheld the recommendations.

November 2011:

The Committee heard an appeal against the imposition of 100% penalty due to the late submission of an application form.

The Appeals Committee found that the terms and guidelines had been applied consistently and correctly as the Department was not notified in advance of the serious illness that led to the late submission. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Due to the exceptional circumstances the Committee recommended that monies be found to pay the appellant, though they acknowledged the money could not come from the CCS.

The Minister upheld the recommendations. It was noted that no precedents have been set. The Department duly considered amending the Scheme to include a force majeure clause with wider scope than existing and has found the current provision to be satisfactory.

March 2009:

The Committee heard an appeal against the classification of some parcels of land as being Above the Mountain Line.

The Committee recommended that 2 fields be re-classified as Below the Mountain Line but that 8 other fields remained as Above the Mountain Line. The Minister upheld the recommendations which have been duly actioned.

September 2010:

The Committee heard an appeal against the inclusion of some land in the 2008 base acreage, corrected for eligible land in 2009, and used for the calculation of Historic Entitlements. The subsequent loss of land meant that all entitlements could not be claimed.

The Committee referred to the information contained in the Farmers' Handbook and recommended that the Department had correctly interpreted the Scheme in relation to this case. They expressed sympathy with the particular and unusual circumstances which befell the applicant and led to this situation. The Minister upheld the recommendation.

December 2010:

The Committee heard an appeal from a National Reserve applicant in relation to the acreage payment they had been awarded. The Minister upheld the Committee’s recommendation that the rules of the scheme had been applied in the way intended by the Farmers’ Handbook and in a manner consistent with the other 2010 applications. The acreage rate therefore remained at the level of the initial award.