Criminal prosecution had not been suspended indefinitely

Case no. 7/2022
Judgment delivered on 22 April 2022

The Public Prosecutor
vs.
T ApS

Haulage company T had been found guilty of breach of the animal welfare rules for being responsible for the negligent treatment of two pigs with blood blisters of the ear during transport to a slaughterhouse in December 2016.

T was charged on 14 June 2017, after which the Prosecution Service emailed a request for an opinion to the National Veterinary Health Council in mid-July 2017. Only when it contacted the Council again in September 2019 did the Prosecution Service learn that the Council had failed to register the receipt of the request in 2017. The Prosecution Service sent the request again, and the Council replied in October 2019. Based on the Council’s opinion, the Prosecution Service brought a charge against T in March 2020.

The case before the Supreme Court concerned the question of whether the dead period that had lasted 26 months implied that the criminal prosecution of T had been suspended indefinitely with the effect that the case was now time-barred.

Based on an overall assessment of the facts of the case, the Supreme Court agreed that there was no basis for concluding that the prosecution of T had been suspended indefinitely, and that the case against the company was thus not time-barred.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court held that there was no basis for changing the fine imposed by the High Court.