UK Offence Report

Unqualified person not to prepare certain instruments, etc.

article 23(1) of Solicitors (Northern Ireland) Order 1976

The instrument creating this offence has not been revoked so far as the data shows.

What the provision says

1 Subject to paragraphs (2) and (2A), any unqualified person who either directly or indirectly—

a draws or prepares any instrument of transfer or charge or any other document for the purposes of the Land Registration Act (Northern Ireland) 1970 or any enactment repealed or proposed to be repealed by that Act;

b draws or prepares any instrument relating to real or personal estate, or any legal proceeding; or

c lodges any instrument or other document or causes it to be lodged for registration in the Land Registry or the Registry of Deeds, or makes any application (other than an application to search in, or to receive copies of or extracts from,

a register) to the Registrar of Titles, shall, unless he proves that the act was not done for or in expectation of any fee, gain or reward, be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

4 on the standard scale.

Text as made, from legislation.gov.uk. © Crown copyright, reused under the Open Government Licence v3.0. This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.

Who it binds, and what has to be proved

Binds
a unqualified person
Conduct
breaching the provision
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

The prosecution must prove that the conduct happened. This is a strict liability offence as drafted: the provision uses no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence, so there is no need to show that a unqualified person meant to do it, knew about it, or was careless.

Intention, knowledge and carelessness are irrelevant to guilt. They may still matter a great deal to sentence.

The provision gives a defence the defendant must prove, on the balance of probabilities. A legal burden of that kind can be read down to a merely evidential one under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 where placing it on the defendant would be disproportionate (R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37; Sheldrake v DPP [2004] UKHL 43).

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision.

The defence, as drafted

tracts from, a register) to the Registrar of Titles, shall, unless he proves that the act was not done for or in expectation of any fee, gain or reward, be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.

What would breach article 23(1)?

These are illustrations, not law. They are generated from the provision’s own words to show the shape of the offence. Whether any particular conduct is caught depends on the full text, on any amendment since, and on the facts.

  1. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Solicitors (Northern Ireland) Order 1976.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£2,500
Standard scale
Level 4
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

in Northern Ireland a reference to a level is construed as referring to the standard scale as it currently stands (Fines and Penalties (NI) Order 1984 art.5(3)), not as it stood when the instrument was made.

Sentencing

Offences of this kind are usually sentenced under the guidelines below. This is a mapping by subject, not a finding about this provision, and the links go to a search of the Sentencing Council’s own site.

Prosecution figures

No published per-offence figure was found for this provision, and it could not be matched to a Ministry of Justice offence code. Offences created by statutory instrument very largely do not have one. Absence of a figure is not evidence that the offence is unused.

Status and lifecycle

Current status
In force
Made
12 April 1976
In force from
Not determined
Extent
N.I.

How this was established: read from the revised (currently in force) text.

What Parliament said

Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

Other offences in the same instrument

How this was identified as an offence

Everything above rests on the judgement that this provision creates a criminal offence, rather than mentioning one. That judgement is made by rule, from the words of the provision, and this is the rule that made it — with a confidence of 0.72.

Basis
the provision states liability on summary conviction; the provision states a penalty in older drafting
Confidence
0.72 of 1.00

A provision that states a penalty for an offence created elsewhere can read very like one that creates an offence, and the rules can mistake the one for the other. If the text quoted above sets a penalty for something made an offence by another provision, treat the classification on this page with that in mind, and read the instrument.

Check the source