A High Court injunction preventing the seizure of more than 70 cattle from two farms in west Cork was granted to a farmer and his son on Wednesday night at a sitting of the court in Bandon, Co Cork.
The week-long injunction was granted to the farmers as personnel from the Special Investigation Unit of the Department of Agriculture and Food were about to remove the animals from the lands at Dunmanway and Macroom.
The SIU had uncovered more than 70 animals on the farms which had not been tagged or registered and had served legal notice on the farmer to prove identity of the animals or have them seized and slaughtered.
Before the Department's deadline was reached, the farmer and his son, also a herd-owner, sought and obtained the week-long injunction from the High Court during which time they must establish the identity and ownership of the animals.
The matter will come up in the courts again next Tuesday, but is likely to be adjourned as the plaintiffs have been obtaining DNA samples to prove the parentage of the beasts.
Meanwhile, earlier this week a code of practice for the SIU which had been promised by the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Mr Walsh, was published.
It was immediately attacked as "fundamentally flawed" by the deputy president of the Irish Farmers' Association, Mr Ruaidhrí Deasy, whose organisation has been highly critical of the Investigations Unit.
The code of practice, he said, did not require the Department to produce prima-facie evidence or provide adequate notice to farmers.
Mr Deasy said that in reality this was a unilateral code of practice produced by the Department of Agriculture for the Department. He added that some of the powers of the SIU were granted in the emergency situation at the time of foot and mouth and made for bad law.
"The Government should not be using law introduced under emergency situations when no emergency exists. This situation can lead to an abuse of power," Mr Deasy said.
He was concerned with the continuing powers of the SIU on entry, search and seizure, particularly in family homes, and objected to the powers to seize and destroy animals with only 48 hours' notice.
"Forty-eight hours is not enough time to obtain DNA tests and the relevant documentation to prove ownership in cases of lost tags or untagged animals," Mr Deasy said.