Meaning of realisable property
paragraph 5(2) of SCHEDULE 3 of The Proceeds of Crime (Countries and Territories designated under the Drug Trafficking Act 1994) Order (Northern Ireland) 1997
- Status not determined
- Objective fault
- Either way
- Courts, police, prisons and the administration of justice
This offence was read from the text as made, and no revised version was available, so a later revocation could not be ruled out. Check the current text at legislation.gov.uk.
What the provision says
2 A person who—
a knows or has reasonable cause to suspect that an investigation is being carried out or is likely to be carried out under this Schedule; and
b falsifies, conceals, destroys or otherwise disposes of, or causes or permits the falsification, concealment, destruction or disposal of, documents which he knows or has reasonable cause to suspect are or would be relevant to such an investigation; shall be guilty of an offence unless he proves that he had no intention of concealing the facts disclosed by the document from any person carrying out such an investigation.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 suspect.
The defence, as drafted
ant to such an investigation; shall be guilty of an offence unless he proves that he had no intention of concealing the facts disclosed by the document from any person carrying out such an investigation.
What would breach paragraph 5(2) of SCHEDULE 3?
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.
- Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Proceeds of Crime (Countries and Territories designated under the Drug Trafficking Act 1994) Order (Northern Ireland) 1997.
Penalty
- Mode of trial
- Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
- Maximum fine
- Not determined
- Standard scale
- Level 5
- Maximum prison (summary)
- 6 months
- Maximum prison (on indictment)
- 6 months
the level is stated but no money value is given: this instrument extends outside the United Kingdom, where the standard scale set by s.122(1) of the Sentencing Act 2020 does not run.
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.
-
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
- Status not determined
- Made
- 3 June 1997
- In force from
- 2 July 1997
- Extent
- Not stated
How this was established: read from the text as made; no revised version available, so later revocation could not be ruled out.
What the instrument is for
(This note is not part of the Order.) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
This Order provides that, subject to certain modifications, the Proceeds of Crime (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 applies to an order made by a court in any of the countries or territories listed in Schedule 1 (being countries and territories designated under section 39 of the Drug Trafficking Act 1994) for the purpose of recovering payments or other rewards received in connection with drug trafficking or their value, and to proceedings which have been or are to be instituted in a designated country or territory and may result in such an order being made there. It also provides, in Article 7, that the value of any property recovered in a designated country or territory in response to a request by the government of the United Kingdom for assistance in the enforcement of an order is to be treated as reducing the amount payable in Northern Ireland under a confiscation order made by the Crown Court. Article 2 applies the provisions of the Proceeds of Crime (Northern Ireland) Order 1996, with modifications, to confiscation orders of courts in those countries and territories and proceedings which may lead to such an order being made. The modifications of the Proceeds of Crime (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 are specified in Schedule 2, and Schedule 3 sets out in full that Order as so modified.
Read the full note and every offence in this instrument
Other offences in the same instrument
- A person shall be guilty of an offence if without reasonable excuse he fails to comply with a requirement…paragraph 5(1) of SCHEDULE 3
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 Proceeds of Crime (Countries and Territories designated under the Drug Trafficking Act 1994) Order (Northern Ireland) 1997 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Courts, police, prisons and the administration of justiceOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 1997