1 Any person who without lawful authority or excuse, proof of which shall lie on him,— a contravenes any…

article 52(1) of The Diseases of Animals (Northern Ireland) Order 1981

• Revoked
• Requires proof of a state of mind
• Either way
• Dogs, animals, hunting and wildlife

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

1 Any person who without lawful authority or excuse, proof of which shall lie on him,—

a contravenes any provision of this Order, or of an order of the Department; or

b refuses to an inspector or other officer, acting in execution of this Order or of an order of the Department, admission to any premises which the inspector or officer is entitled to enter or examine, or obstructs or impedes him in so entering or examining, or otherwise in any respect obstructs or impedes an inspector or constable or other officer in the execution of his duty, or

c in purported compliance with

a requirement to furnish information which is imposed on him under Article 7, knowingly or recklessly furnishes information which is false in

a material particular, or

d throws or places, or causes or suffers to be thrown or placed, into or in any river, stream, canal, navigation or other water, or into or in the sea within 4.8 kilometres of the shore, the carcass of an animal or bird which has died of disease, or been slaughtered as diseased or suspected, shall be guilty of an offence against this Order.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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

obstructing an official exercising a power

Fault element

Requires proof of a state of mind

Burden of proof

An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (knowingly, knowingly or recklessly, recklessly).

“Without reasonable excuse” here is an element of the offence rather than a defence, so its absence is for the prosecution to prove (R v Charles [2009] EWCA Crim 1570).

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: knowingly, recklessly, knowingly or recklessly; qualified by lawful excuse (an element).

The defence, as drafted

1 Any person who without lawful authority or excuse, proof of which shall lie on him,— a contravenes any provision of this Order, or of an order of the Department; or b refuses to an inspector or other officer, acting in execution of this Order or of an order of the Department, admission to any premises which

What would breach article 52(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. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Diseases of Animals (Northern Ireland) Order 1981.
2. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
3. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

Penalty

Mode of trial

Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court

Maximum fine

£1,000

Standard scale

Level 3

Maximum prison (summary)

2 months

Maximum prison (on indictment)

2 years

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.

• Animal cruelty: definitive guideline Magistrates' courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 July 2017

  Covers cruelty to and neglect of animals, and the associated disqualification and deprivation orders.

• Imposition of community and custodial sentences: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales

  When a community order or custody is justified at all, and the presumption against short custodial sentences.

• Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 June 2017

  The sliding scale of credit for pleading guilty, from one third at the first stage of proceedings downwards.

• General guideline: overarching principles All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2019

  The guideline a court uses when there is no offence-specific guideline, which is the position for the overwhelming majority of offences created by statutory instrument. It sets out how culpability and harm are assessed from first principles.

• Totality: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales

  How to sentence more than one offence at once so that the total is just and proportionate - frequently in point here, because regulatory prosecutions commonly charge several breaches of the same instrument.

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

Revoked

Revoked by

The Transport of Animals and Poultry (Cleansing and Disinfection) Order (Northern Ireland) 2007

Revoked on

28 May 2007

Made

31 July 1981

In force from

Not determined

Extent

N.I.

How this was established: the instrument was revoked by a later instrument found in this corpus.

Other offences in the same instrument

• Orders prohibiting import of animals, etcarticle 24(5)
• A person to whom a restriction notice is given commits an offence (whether or not the notice is the subject…article 32G(1)
• Any other person commits an offence if he uses any semen, egg or embryo which he knows, or has reasonable…article 32G(2)
• If any person has in his possession or administers to any animal a substance, in contravention of Article…article 35(1)
• Powers of entry: supplementary provisionsarticle 46C(11)
• (l) rep. by SR 2003/495 m where the Department has by order prohibited, absolutely or conditionally, the use…article 52(2)
• A person who— a fails to give his name and address when required to do so under Article 46C(4); or b gives a…article 52(8)
• Any person who knowingly or recklessly makes any false statement for the purpose of obtaining for himself or…article 53(1)
• Any person who obstructs or impedes any person duly authorised under Article 9 to make any inspection shall…article 53(2)
• Deliberate infectionarticle 5A(1)
• Deliberate infectionarticle 5A(2)

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

• This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
• The Diseases of Animals (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
• Dogs, animals, hunting and wildlifeOther offences on the same subject
• Offences created in 1981