UK Offence Report

Provision for inspection and rights of entry

article 180(2) of The Betting, Gaming, Lotteries and Amusements (Northern Ireland) Order 1985

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

2 If the holder of any licence, certificate or permit held in respect of any premises mentioned in paragraph (1)(a), or any officer of the registered society or registered club, or any person organising the entertainment or exempt entertainment, as the case may require, or any person acting on behalf of any such holder, officer or person—

a fails without reasonable excuse to admit

a constable who demands admission to the premises under paragraph (1); or

b on being required by

a constable to do so, fails without reasonable excuse to permit the constable to inspect the premises or any gaming machine, machine or other equipment on those premises; or

c on being required by

a constable to produce any book or document in his possession or under his control which relates to the premises and which the constable reasonably requires to inspect for the purpose specified in paragraph (1), fails without reasonable excuse to produce it to the constable and to permit the constable to remove the book or document for the purpose of taking copies of it or of any entry in it; or

d fails or refuses to answer to the best of his knowledge and ability any question asked of him by

a constable in exercise of the power conferred by paragraph (1) or gives an answer to any such question which is to his knowledge false or misleading; he shall be guilty of an offence.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
making a false or misleading statement
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 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.

“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

ng on behalf of any such holder, officer or person— a fails without reasonable excuse to admit a constable who demands admission to the premises under paragraph (1); or b on being required by a constable to do so, fails without reasonable excuse to permit the constable to inspect the premises or any gaming machine, machine or other equipment o

What would breach article 180(2)?

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. Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Betting, Gaming, Lotteries and Amusements (Northern Ireland) Order 1985.
  2. Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
  3. Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Licensing (Register of Licences) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1988
Revoked on
5 December 1988
Made
31 July 1985
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

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