UK Offence Report

Unlawful eviction and harassment of occupier

article 54(1) of Rent (Northern Ireland) Order 1978

The instrument creating this offence has not been revoked so far as the data shows.

What the provision says

1 If any person unlawfully deprives the tenant of

a dwelling-house of his occupation of the dwelling-house or any part thereof or attempts to do so he shall be guilty of an offence unless he proves that he believed, and had reasonable cause to believe, that the tenant had ceased to reside in the dwelling-house.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 person
Conduct
breaching the provision
Fault element
Objective fault
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

The prosecution must prove that the conduct happened and that it fell below the standard the provision sets. That is an objective test - what a reasonable person in the same position would have done, not what this defendant actually thought.

What a person personally believed or intended is not the question; the standard is what was reasonable.

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: objective standard in the offence-creating words: reasonable cause to believe.

The defence, as drafted

ereof or attempts to do so he shall be guilty of an offence unless he proves that he believed, and had reasonable cause to believe, that the tenant had ceased to reside in the dwelling-house.

What would breach article 54(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 Rent (Northern Ireland) Order 1978.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£500
Maximum prison (summary)
6 months
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

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
25 July 1978
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 0.92.

Basis
the provision says a person is “guilty of an offence”
Confidence
0.92 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