AFTER one of the longest and most expensive cases in English legal

history, Rechem International has finally fought off a Scottish dairy

farming couple's claims that their pedigree Ayrshire herd was ''wiped

out'' by toxic incinerator fumes.

In their David and Goliath battle, Andrew and Irene Graham alleged

toxic emissions from the incinerator at Bonnybridge, Stirlingshire,

between March 1982 and its closure in October 1984 caused catastrophic

illness in 300 of their pedigree Ayrshire cattle.

However, Mr Justice Forbes, at the end of a 323-page written judgment,

said: ''I am left in no doubt that Rechem is not responsible in any way

for the ill-health that afflicted the Grahams' dairy herd in the

1980s.''

The case had lasted 198 days in court spread over 14 months and ran up

a legal costs bill estimated at #3m -- half of which falls on the Legal

Aid Board.

Permission to have the case heard in England was obtained after the

Grahams ran into trouble obtaining legal aid in Scotland.

After the judge had handed down his judgment -- he said it would have

taken him 12 to 13 hours to read out -- Mr Graham, 61, said he was

''fairly disappointed''. He added: ''Twelve years of fighting has been

worth it to get it into court.''

His wife, Irene said: ''We are extremely disappointed. This is our

life. I definitely felt someone had to do something. We stood up for

what we believed in.''

Their solicitor, Mr Anton Bates, said the judgment would be studied in

detail to decide the prospects for a successful appeal and to see how it

affected other cases pending against Rechem.

He added that the Legal Aid Board, in agreeing to back the Grahams'

case, had recognised the public interest in the safe incineration of

toxic waste.

Rechem's parent company, Shanks & McEwan, said: ''We have been very

confident right from the outset and, of course, we are delighted with

today's outcome.

''It confirms that there was no link between the operations of the

former Bonnybridge plant and Mr and Mrs Graham's farming and livestock

problems of over a decade ago.

''On a personal level, we can sympathise with the stresses the Grahams

have been under but earlier detailed studies and eminent scientific

evidence stated that there was no basis for their assertions that the

Bonnybridge plant had been responsible for illness among their cattle.

''Despite this, the claim, funded by legal aid, proceeded, culminating

in an extremely time consuming and costly trial. We are very satisfied

that, in the end, the Grahams' allegations and their claim for damages

have been proved to be unfounded.''

Mr Graham and his 44-year-old wife, based at Tambowie Farm, Milngavie,

near Glasgow, also grazed livestock at West Bankhead Farm, Denny, two

miles from Bonnybridge.

Suing Rechem for negligence and nuisance, they alleged that fall-out

from the incinerator containing toxins such as PCBs and dioxins was

ingested by their cows which developed illnesses including as eye

defects and died or had to be destroyed.

Rechem argued that the problems arose from poor husbandry. It alleged

that the Grahams ''wrought havoc with the health of their herd'' by

grossly overfeeding the cattle in an attempt to boost milk yields and

alleviate their debt crisis, resulting in ''fat cow syndrome''.

The company, which said it closed the plant for economic reasons,

insisted it took the greatest care to incinerate waste at very high

temperatures to destroy chemicals, and stringent measures were taken to

contain harmful effluent.

Mr Justice Forbes held that the incinerator did not emit toxins ''in

anything other than negligible quantities throughout its operational

life and certainly not in sufficient amounts to pose any kind of risk to

either animal or human health''.

The judge said he was satisfied that, on a broad view, the incinerator

was operated and managed by Rechem in a ''generally satisfactory

manner''.

He accepted Rechem's contention that the Grahams' herd was afflicted

by an outbreak of ''fat cow syndrome'', largely as a result of excessive

feeding of concentrate to lactating animals.

The main, if not exclusive, reason for the over-feeding was the desire

to boost milk production and increase income.

''There was also the need to ensure that the farm obtained a high milk

quota,'' he said.

The Grahams claimed other farmers in the district had also suffered

unusual problems.

However, the judge said the evidence demonstrated ''beyond any shadow

of a doubt'' that none of the neighbours suffered any significant or

unusual health problems in the period 1980 to 1984, let alone any

problems that could plausibly be attributed to chemical contamination.

The secretary of local pressure group Scottie -- the Society for the

Control of Toxic and Troublesome Emissions -- said that, despite losing,

the Grahams had done a great service to Scotland.

Dr John Wheeler, a science teacher at Grangemouth High School, said

that by bringing the case they had highlighted the disposal of hazardous

waste as an area for public vigilance.