The validity of confiscation of catch settlement

Justice: Skoghøy, Matheson, Noer, Thyness, Sæther

The Norwegian Herring Sales Association had made a decision temporarily to stop fishing and selling the fish species sandeel. This was due to price factors and an unclear turnover situation. A Danish fishing vessel nevertheless sold its catch, which had been fished in Danish waters. The Herring Sales Association confiscated the catch settlement in accordance with section 21 of the Fish Sales Act. The decision to confiscate was upheld by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries. The acquirer of the claim for settlement of the catch held that the confiscation was invalid because it lacked a legal basis. The Supreme Court concluded that section 13 of the Fish Sales Act is a legal basis for stopping not only the fishing activity, but also the trade, provided that the reduction in turnover has made it necessary. However, the provision aims at situations where the reduction causes problems because the receiving facilities are not able to keep up with the supply of raw materials – which was not the case here – and does not provide a legal basis for stopping the fishing and trade due to the turnover situation. For this reason, the decision to stop the fishing was invalid, and trade in violation of it could not justify confiscation. The same applied to the fact that the catch was traded without a permit from the Herring Sales Association. Against this background, the decision to confiscate the catch settlement was ruled invalid.

Read the whole judgment (Norwegian only)