The Court of Appeal has reimposed a €500 fine and confiscation of catch and fishing gear valued at €400,460 on a fishing vessel master, after reconsidering whether the forfeiture was proportionate under EU law.
The appeal concerned the sentence imposed on Klass Dirk Meijvogel, who was convicted by a jury in Cork Circuit Criminal Court in 2015. The offence was carrying equipment aboard the UK-registered Wiron 5 that could automatically grade certain fish by size, where the equipment was not installed to ensure immediate freezing or prevent marine organisms being returned to sea. His original sentence included confiscation of catch valued at €344,960 and fishing gear valued at €55,000.
In July 2023, the Court of Appeal quashed that sentence after finding the sentencing judge had wrongly believed forfeiture was mandatory and had no discretion to assess proportionality. The court then received further evidence and submissions before resentencing. It considered the case under Article 89 of the EU Control Regulation, rather than Article 90.
The prosecution did not charge Meijvogel with actual high grading. The appeal court said no significant actual economic benefit to him had been proved, although it found potential benefit had not been quantified. It also accepted evidence that widespread infringements of this kind could undermine fish stock assessments and the management advice used under the Common Fisheries Policy, making effective deterrence necessary.
The court found that Meijvogel may have suffered a temporary loss of income while the vessel was detained and modified, but there was no evidence the forfeiture would significantly affect his future ability to work as a fishing vessel master. It gave little weight to his claim that the equipment had appeared compliant after inspections, and rejected as unconvincing evidence that only a minimal quantity of fish was discharged through the chute. The court preferred the trial transcript evidence of what a naval boarding party member observed.
The judges assessed Meijvogel’s culpability as moderate, describing the harm actually done as minor but the potential for harm as great. They concluded that the forfeiture provision did not go beyond what was necessary to achieve the legislation’s objectives and declined to disapply it. The court said the sanction would primarily affect the vessel’s owner, rather than Meijvogel personally. It therefore reimposed the €500 fine and ordered confiscation of catch valued at €344,960 and fishing gear valued at €55,000.