Court victory for multi-foil manufacturers

There were two grounds of complaint, one was that the multifoil manufacturers were not consulted by the govt before making the policy. That was a breach of their 'legitimate expectations' to have their point of view taken into account in a decision making process which was going to have a pretty drastic effect on them economically.

The second was that the govt did not lodge a copy of the draft before the EC so that other countries (isn't France the home of Actis?) would have a chance to object to the commission that it was actually a measure designed to restrict free trade dressed up in guise of a technical requirement.

Yes, for now. Like all judicial reviews, the impact is limited in that as it is a review of procedure rather than substance, so there is nothing to prevent the govt reissuing the same document - as long as this time they consult first with the multifoil association, Actis, etc and lodge a draft with the EC (I imagine you probably then have to wait a few months for objections to be lodged, but I haven't looked at the Reg or Directive in question). By the nature of the JR beast, there is no requirement to agree with snake oil salesmen, just a duty to listen to them and consider their views on the merits of snake oil when reaching the decision.

Hiatus there will be.