UK Offence Report

Application of various provisions of the Order

regulation 7(2) of Contaminants in Food Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2002

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 The authorised officer may either—

a give notice to the person in charge of the food that, until the notice is withdrawn, the food or any specified portion of it—

i is not to be used for human consumption; and

ii either is not to be removed or is to be removed to

a place at which there are facilities to carry out the sampling required by Directive 98/53/EC, Directive 2001/22/EC or Directive 2002/26/EC, as appropriate, or

b seize the food and remove it in order to have it dealt with by

a justice of the peace; and any person who knowingly contravenes the requirements of

a notice under sub-paragraph (a) shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

5 on the standard scale.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
failing to comply with a notice or direction
Fault element
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: knowingly.

What would breach regulation 7(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. On these words an offence is committed where a person knowingly contravenes the requirements of a notice under sub-paragraph (a).
  2. Being served with a notice under the Contaminants in Food Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2002 and doing nothing by the date it specifies.
  3. Doing part of what the notice requires, where it required all of it.
  4. Disagreeing with the notice and ignoring it, rather than using whatever appeal the instrument provides.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

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.

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
12 June 2002
In force from
29 July 2002
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 Regulations.) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations, which revoke and re-enact with changes the Contaminants in Food Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1997 (S.R. 1997 No. 338, as amended)— a make provision for the enforcement and execution of Commission Regulation (E.C.) No. 466/2001 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs (O.J. No. L77, 16.3.2001, p. 1, as amended) (“the Commission Regulation”); and b implement the following Commission Directives— i Commission Directive 98/53/EC laying down the sampling methods and methods of analysis for the official control of the levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs (O.J. No. L201, 17.7.98, p. 93), ii Commission Directive 2001/22/EC laying down the sampling methods and the methods of analysis for the official control of the levels of lead, cadmium, mercury and 3–MCPD in foodstuffs (O.J. No. L77, 16.3.2001, p. 14, as corrected by a Commission Decision of 4th December 2001 (O.J. No. L325, 8.12.2001, p. 34)), iii Commission Directive 2002/26/EC laying down the sampling methods and the methods of analysis for the official control of the levels of ochratoxin A in foodstuffs (O.J. No. L75, 16.3.2002, p. 38), and iv Commission Directive 2002/27/EC amending Directive 98/53/EC laying down the sampling methods and the methods of analysis for the official control of the levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs (O.J. No. L75, 16.3.2002, p. 44). The Regulations— a subject to transitional provisions (regulations 8 and 9), provide that it is an offence to— i place on the market certain foods if they contain contaminants of any kind specified in the Commission Regulation at levels exceeding those specified (subject to a derogation applicable to certain types of lettuce and spinach), ii use foods containing such contaminants at such levels as ingredients in the production of certain foods, iii mix foods which comply with the maxima referred to above with foods which do not, iv mix foods to which the Commission Regulation relates and which are intended for direct consumption with foods to which the Commission Regulation relates and which are intended to be sorted or otherwise treated prior to consumption, or v detoxify by chemical treatments food not complying with the limits specified in the Commission Regulation (regulation 3); b specify the enforcement authority (regulation 4); c prescribe sampling and analysis requirements in relation to foods subject to the Commission Regulation, and in so doing modify Article 29 of the Food Safety (Northern Ireland) Order 1991 so far as it applies to the taking of samples of the foods concerned (regulation 5); d provide a defence in relation to exports in implementation of Articles 2 and 3 of Council Directive 89/397/EEC (O.J. No. L186, 30.6.89, p. 23) on the official control of foodstuffs, as read with the ninth recital to that Directive (regulation 6); e provide for the application of specified provisions of the Food Safety (Northern Ireland) Order 1991 for the purposes thereof (regulation 7); and g revoke specified provisions (including, as already indicated, the Contaminants in Food Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1997) (regulation 10 and the Schedule).

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

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