<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/04/2014 21:41, Clive D.W. Feather
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:20140409204158.GA69784@davros.org" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Peter Fairbrother said:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">However I don't think it actually matters much whether the Regulations
are invalid or whether they are technically still valid but you don't
have to obey them.
I haven't (yet) come across a credible theory which demands that they
still must be obeyed ...
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
The Regulations were made legally. We may believe that a lack of valid
Directive behind them makes them ultra vires, but no court has said that
yet. Until one does, you're surely bound to obey them.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
No, it's a defence to a claim (civil or criminal) based on
infringement of secondary legislation that it is invalid eg (as in
this case) for being ultra vires. If it's void, it's void, and
doesn't depend on a court to say so.<br>
<br>
Nicholas<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<style type="text/css">
A:link
{ text-decoration: none; color:#0000bb; }
A:visited
{ text-decoration: none; color:#990099; }
A:active
{ text-decoration: none; color:#bb0000; }
A:hover
{ text-decoration: underline; color:#bb0000; }
</style><span style="font-family: monospace;"><a
href="http://www.ernest.net/contact/index.htm">Contact
and PGP key here</a></span><br>
</div>
</body>
</html>