EXPOSED: Mowi’s Cache of Carcinogenic Chemicals On Conservative MSP’s Estate

From: McSherry, Euan <emcsherry@acandco.com>
Date: Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 1:31 PM
Subject: Unauthorised intrusion at Loch Arkaig and urgent request to move online material – July 2019 (694168)
To: salmonfarmingkills@gmail.com <salmonfarmingkills@gmail.com>

Mr Staniford

1. Introduction

We act on behalf of Mowi Scotland Limited (Mowi), formerly known as Marine Harvest (Scotland) Limited. We had cause to write to you in (i) November 2017, (ii) October 2018 and (iii) June 2019. On each occasion we requested that you delete identified, offending material and to confirm that said material would not be more widely disseminated. You complied with the November 2017 request. You removed two of the three offending online videos identified in our October 2018 request. You have removed none of the offending online videos in our June 2019 request. On each occasion you have refused to provide the requested confirmation. On each occasion, our client asked you to cease your unauthorised activities at Mowi’s fish farms and processing plants. However, such unauthorised intrusions continue.

1. Unauthorised Access

The content of the published online video – accessed via this link: https://vimeo.com/347341760 – demonstrates that you attended at Mowi’s Loch Arkaig fish farm in July 2019 without authorisation. Our client has legitimate and grave concerns about this intrusion as it contravenes their biosecurity and health and safety policies and safe ways of working. All Mowi farms (whether aquatic or terrestrial) need to ensure the highest standards of animal health and welfare, and of staff and vistitor health, safety and wellbeing. All visitors need to comply with site specific protocols in order to protect fish, visitors, staff and property. Our client is not going to allow its staff, product or reckless third parties to be exposed to the risk of unauthorised activities which pose a clear and present danger to is biosecurity and health and safety policies and safe ways of working. Further unauthorised activities and incursions will be reported to Police Scotland. Further, our client reserves the right to take civil proceedings against you should you continue to pursue unauthorised activities on, over or at our client’s fish farms and processing plants across Scotland.

1. Defamatory statements

The Loch Arkaig site was fallow at the time of your filming. Contrary to the your statements, some of intermediate bulk containers (IBCs) filmed held formaldehyde, some did not. Many IBCs were holding net ropes and other equipment. Products using formaldehyde are used, with the approval of the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, for dis-infection, fumigation and foot bathing purposes in the  farming of fish, poultry, sheep and cattle. Our client’s use of such products is licensed and permitted.

The following content of the video is defamatory of Mowi. You rightly state that Sainsbury’s supermarkets sell Mowi/Marine Harvest farmed salmon. You go on to state, or infer, that (i) our client is not a responsible retailer, (ii) that its salmon product is toxic and (iii) that it is releasing toxic chemicals into the marine environment. You ask the public not to buy Scottish salmon and say that it is toxic. Through the proximity of your statements, the inference is that our client’s farmed salmon, if eaten, is hazardous to the health of the public at large. I take from your involvement in litigation proceedings in British Columbia in 2012 and 2013 that you are aware of the distinction between subjective and objective standards of assessment. As under Canadian law, under Scots law the test to be applied to the defamatory statements brought to your attention is an objective one, and an objective approach is also taken when asking whether statements found to be defamatory will lower the reputation of a legal person in the eyes of right thinking members of society generally. The fact that you may believe something to be true is, with respect, not a relevant defence. It is irrelevant in law if you believe that something which conflicts with your views and vision is wrong. These matters are set out more eloquently in the trial judge’s opinion in Mainstram Canada v. Staniford 2012 BCSC 1433, in particular paragraphs 186 to 188, and the Honourable Mr. Justice Tysoe’s written reasons in Mainstream Canada v. Staniford 2013 BCCA 341, in particular paragraphs 24 to 48.

Your statements are false, defamatory and, viewed objectively, they lower the reputation of Mowi in the eyes of right thinking members of society generally. Your entreaty to the public is founded on the falsehoods you have advanced and seeks to cause Mowi economic loss.

1. Conclusion

As noted previously, my client does not seek to stifle free speech or debate but it will act to protect its reputation. Mowi has asked that we provide you with 48 hours to remove  the identified video and to confirm that the original videos, or any versions or copies of them, will not be disseminated more widely. We trust that this matter can be resolved amicably and without having to have recourse to the courts. If the identified, offending material is not removed by the expiry of the stated period for removal, our client will consider approaching the courts to have you ordained to do so. However, as stated, our client would prefer to see the permanent deletion of the identified, offending material via this approach

The objects of this correspondence are the removal of the offending material and the cessation of the unauthorised activities at Mowi’s business premises. It is not to set out the precise terms of any subsequent litigation which is necessary. This email is accordingly without prejudice to our client's whole rights and pleas and may not be referred to in any future court, alternative dispute resolution or tribunal proceedings whatsoever without the express and written consent of our clients or at their instance.

Yours faithfully

Euan McSherry 
Partner | Aberdein Considine