UK Offence Report

Information relating to disabilities etc.

article 15D of Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1981

The instrument creating this offence has not been revoked so far as the data shows.

What the provision says

15D Article 11 shall apply to a Community licence holder who is normally resident in Northern Ireland as if— a in paragraph (1), for the words from the beginning to aware there were substituted “If a Community licence holder who is authorised by virtue Article 15A(1) to drive in Northern Ireland a motor vehicle of any class, is aware immediately before the relevant date (as defined by Article 15A(8)), or becomes aware on or after that date”, b for paragraph (3B) there were substituted— 3B A person who is authorised by virtue of Article 15A(1) to drive in Northern Ireland a motor vehicle of any class and who drives on a road a motor vehicle of that class is guilty of an offence if at any earlier time while he was so authorised he was required by paragraph (1) to notify the Department but has failed without reasonable excuse to do so. c in paragraph (4), the words “an applicant for, or”, in each place where they occur, were omitted, d in paragraph (5), the words “applicant or”, and the words from the beginning of sub-paragraph (c) to “provisional licence” were omitted, e in paragraph (6)(b), the words “applicant or” in each place where they occur, were omitted, f in paragraph (7), the words “applicant or”, where they occur, were omitted, and g in paragraph (8)— i for “10” there were substituted “15C”, and ii the words “applicant or”, in each place where they occur, were omitted.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 community licence holder
Conduct
breaching the provision
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

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 community licence holder 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.

“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: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

ed by paragraph (1) to notify the Department but has failed without reasonable excuse to do so. c in paragraph (4), the words “an applicant for, or”, in each place where they occur, were omitted, d in paragraph (5), the words “applicant or”, and the words from the beginning of sub-paragraph (c) to “provisional licence” were omitted, e in parag

What would breach article 15D?

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 Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1981.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Not determined
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

no penalty is stated in this instrument; it may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence.

No penalty was determined from this instrument. It may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence. Absence of a figure here is not evidence that the offence carries no penalty.

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
10 February 1981
In force from
Not determined
Extent
N.I.

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

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