UK Offence Report

Use and storage of feedingstuffs containing fishmeal

regulation 25A(4) of The Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (Amendment No.3) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2005 (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

4 A person who fails to comply with paragraph (2) 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
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 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.

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 25A(4)?

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 fails to comply with paragraph (2).
  2. Not doing what the provision requires under the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (Amendment No.3) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2005, by the time it requires it to be done.
  3. Doing it, but not in the manner or to the standard the instrument specifies.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

expressed as the statutory maximum (the prescribed sum): the same words mean £5,000 in England and Wales and £10,000 in Scotland.

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
3 October 2005
In force from
25 October 2005
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 (“the 2002 Regulations”), which give effect in Northern Ireland to the enforcement and administration of Regulation (EC) No. 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22nd May 2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies. Other amending Regulations are S.R. 2003 No. 495, S.R. 2003 No. 509, S.R. 2004 No. 388, S.R. 2005 No. 25 and S.R. 2005 No. 200. These Regulations also give effect in part to Article 16a of Council Directive 95/53/EC of 25th October 1995 fixing the principles governing the organization of official inspections in the field of animal nutrition (O.J. No. L265, 8.11.95, p.17). Article 16a was inserted by Directive 2001/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (O.J. No. L234, 1.9.2001, p.55). The relevant provision is contained in new regulation 25B of the 2002 Regulations, inserted by regulation 8. The main changes are as follows: Amendments are made to certain definitions contained in regulation 3 of the 2002 Regulations (regulation 4); New regulation 10A of, and new Schedule 1A to, the 2002 Regulations make provision for a regime for the slaughter for human consumption of cattle over thirty months of age and new regulation 10B prohibits consignment to a slaughterhouse of a bovine animal born or reared in the United Kingdom before 1st August 1996 or imported into the United Kingdom before 1st August 1996 (regulation 5 and the Schedule); Regulation 23 of the 2002 Regulations is amended to make provision relating to the use of premises for the production of feedingstuffs containing fishmeal (regulation 6); New regulation 25A of the 2002 Regulations contains further provisions about feedingstuffs containing fishmeal and new regulation 25B relates to the submission of samples of feedingstuffs to laboratories (regulation 8); Regulations 33 and 36 of the 2002 Regulations are amended to make provision for the enforcement of measures contained in Regulation (EC) No. 999/2001 concerning the labelling of bovine carcases containing vertebral column and the removal of vertebral column from such carcases (regulations 10 and 11); Regulation 37 of the 2002 Regulations is replaced by a new regulation relating to the removal of spinal cord from sheep and goats (regulation 12); Regulation 38 of the 2002 Regulations is replaced by a new regulation relating to the stamping of the carcases of young lambs and young goats from which the spleen and ileum have been removed (regulation 13).

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