## Facts

- Several market traders were prosecuted by local authorities for using or displaying imperial units as primary indications in trade, contrary to domestic regulations implementing an EU units-of-measurement directive.
- The prosecutions relied on secondary legislation made under the European Communities Act 1972 authorizing implementation of EU obligations, including the Units of Measurement Regulations 1994 and related instruments, which required metric units as primary indications after 1 January 2000 while permitting imperial units only as supplementary indications.
- Steve Thoburn, a greengrocer, used weighing equipment stamped in imperial but not metric units and was warned before prosecution; he was convicted in a magistrates’ court.
- Colin Hunt and other traders were similarly convicted for pricing or weighing goods using imperial units as primary indications.
- The traders appealed by case stated to the Divisional Court (Queen’s Bench Division).

## Issues

1. Whether the Weights and Measures Act 1985 impliedly repealed the ministerial power in the European Communities Act 1972 to make secondary legislation restricting imperial units in order to implement EU obligations.
2. Whether the 1994 metrication regulations and related instruments were valid exercises of the delegated power under the European Communities Act 1972.
3. On what domestic legal basis EU law norms implemented through the European Communities Act 1972 take priority over inconsistent domestic law, and whether that Act can be displaced by implied repeal.

## Decision

- The Divisional Court dismissed the conjoined appeals and upheld the convictions.
- The court held that the Weights and Measures Act 1985 did not impliedly repeal the relevant provisions of the European Communities Act 1972.
- The court upheld the validity of the 1994 regulations and related instruments implementing the EU directive and restricting imperial units to supplementary indications.
- The court characterized the European Communities Act 1972 as a constitutional statute not subject to implied repeal; any repeal or abrogation required clear legislative intention.

## Legal Principles

- EU law rights and obligations given effect through the European Communities Act 1972 take priority in domestic law over inconsistent domestic rules, including inconsistent provisions in later-enacted primary legislation, unless Parliament clearly provides otherwise.
- The common law recognizes a category of “constitutional statutes” that are not subject to repeal by implication; repeal or abrogation requires express words or an equally clear indication of actual legislative intent.
- The domestic legal basis for the priority of EU-derived norms in the United Kingdom rests on Parliament’s enactment of the European Communities Act 1972, not on an external source of authority.
- Secondary legislation made within the scope of delegated powers under the European Communities Act 1972 is valid to implement EU directives and to modify domestic regulatory regimes accordingly.

## Conclusion

The court upheld traders’ convictions for using imperial units as primary indications, validating the metrication regulations made under the European Communities Act 1972 and holding that the Act is a constitutional statute immune from implied repeal, with the domestic priority of EU-derived norms grounded in Parliament’s choice to enact the Act.


Thoburn v. Sunderland City Council, [2003] Q.B. 151 (Q.B.D. 2002)