UK Offence Report

Subsequent occupiers

regulation 8 of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2004 (revoked)

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

8 If there is

a change in occupation of any holding to which

a notice under this Part relates, the previous occupier shall ensure that the subsequent occupier is made aware of the existence and contents of any notice, and failure to do so shall be 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
an previous occupier
Conduct
failing to do something the instrument requires
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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 an previous occupier 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.

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

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision.

What would breach regulation 8?

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. Not doing what the provision requires under the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2004, by the time it requires it to be done.
  2. Doing it, but not in the manner or to the standard the instrument specifies.

Penalty

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

no penalty is stated here: this instrument amends another one, and the penalty for the offence is in the instrument being amended.

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
Status not determined
Made
10 September 2004
In force from
4 October 2004
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 amend the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2002 (S.R. 2002 No. 225). They make provision for the enforcement of Annex VII (other than paragraphs 1(a) and 2(a)) to Regulation (EC) No. 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (O.J. No. L147, 31.5.2001, p. 1). Annex VII to that Regulation was first replaced in respect of ovine and caprine animals by Commission Regulation (EC) No. 260/2003 amending Regulation (EC) No. 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the eradication of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies in ovine and caprine animals and rules for the trade in live ovine and caprine animals and bovine embryos (O.J. No. L37, 13.02.2003, p. 7). The Annex was subsequently replaced by Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1915/2003 (O.J. No. L283, 31.10.2003, p. 29) and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1492/2004 (O.J. No. L274, 24.08.2004, p. 3). They add a new Schedule 6A to the Regulations. Part I of this Schedule provides that the Department is the competent authority for the purposes of Annex VII to the EU Regulation (paragraph 1 of the Schedule). It makes provision for notices to be served and procedures to be followed following confirmation of TSE in sheep and goats (paragraphs 2 to 8). Part II of the Schedule (paragraphs 9 to 13) regulates movement of sheep and goats following service of a notice under Part I and provides for potential derogations specified in Annex VII to the EU Regulation (paragraph 14). Part III provides an appeals procedure against notices served under the Schedule. Part IV specifies compensation for animals, embryos and ova destroyed in accordance with the Schedule. An additional amendment to the markets listed in Schedule 1, Part III 13(2) of the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2002 is included. These markets are required to submit returns on a weekly basis to the Department, to facilitate the calculation of the indicative market price used in compensation for TSE suspects. Not all those markets currently listed trade in the categories of animals for which a return requires to be furnished. To address this issue and achieve a more accurate reflection of market prices Enniskillen market is replaced by Saintfield market.

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 0.88.

Basis
the provision says the conduct “is an offence”; the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.88 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