UK Offence Report

13 It is an offence— a to fail to comply with a notice served under Article 10(2); b intentionally to…

article 13 of The Non-Commercial Movement of Pet Animals Order (Northern Ireland) 2011

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

13 It is an offence—

a to fail to comply with

a notice served under Article 10(2);

b intentionally to obstruct any person acting in the execution of the relevant instruments;

c without reasonable cause, to fail to give to any such person any assistance or information that that person may reasonably require;

d to furnish to any such person any information knowing it to be false or misleading (including information contained in

a passport or health certificate); or

e to fail to produce

a document or record (including

a passport or health certificate) to any such person when required to do so.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
obstructing an official exercising a power
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 (intentionally, knowing it to be).

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: intentionally, knowing it to be.

What would breach article 13?

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. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Non-Commercial Movement of Pet Animals Order (Northern Ireland) 2011.
  2. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
  3. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

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
Status not determined
Made
21 December 2011
In force from
1 January 2012
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 enforces— a Commission Decision 2003/459/EC on certain protection measures with regard to monkey pox virus (O.J. No L 154, 21.6.2003, p.112), b Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 on the animal health requirements applicable to the non-commercial movement of pet animals and amending Council Directive 92/65/EEC (O.J. No L 146, 13.6.2003, p.1), c Commission Decision 2006/146/EC on certain protection measures with regard to certain fruit bats, dogs and cats coming from Malaysia (Peninsula) and Australia (O.J. No L 55, 25.2.2006, p.44), d Commission Decision 2007/25/EC as regards certain protection measures in relation to highly pathogenic avian influenza and movements of pet birds accompanying their owners into the Community (O.J. No L 8, 13.1.2007, p.29), and e Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1152/2011 supplementing Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards preventive health measures for the control of Echinococcus multilocularis infection in dogs (O.J. No L 296, 15.11.2011, p.6). Part 1 provides definitions and designates the Department as the competent authority responsible for various functions under the Order. Part 2 concerns the preventive health measures that apply to the movement of pet animals to Northern Ireland to protect against the risk of the introduction of rabies, Echinococcus multilocularis (tapeworm), Hendra disease, Nipah disease and highly pathogenic avian influenza into Northern Ireland. Article 5 (1)(a) operates so as to exempt a pet dog, cat or ferret from the provisions of the Rabies (Importation of Dogs, Cats and Other Mammals) Order (Northern Ireland) 1977 (S.R. 1977 No.113) (“the 1977 Order”) provided the pet dog, cat or ferret meets all preventive health measures that are applicable to that animal. Pet rodents and rabbits (as well as certain other species) brought to Northern Ireland from another member State or other European country listed in Part B of Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 998/2003 are also exempt from the provisions of the 1977 Order, as are pet animals brought to Northern Ireland from Great Britain, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man (Article 5(1)(b) and (c)). A pet bird brought to Northern Ireland from a third country (subject to certain exceptions) which does not comply with the preventive health measures in Commission Decision 2007/25/EC may be re-exported, detained in quarantine or destroyed. Part 3 provides for the landing in Northern Ireland of recognised assistance dogs being brought into Northern Ireland on a Community air carrier. Part 4 contains provisions relating to enforcement. Inspectors are given powers to require compliance with the Order, including powers of entry and seizure. Offences listed in Article 13(a) are punishable on summary conviction to a fine only. Offences listed in Article 13(b) to 13(e) relating to obstruction of authorised officers or falsification of documentation is punishable on summary conviction to a fine or up to three months’ imprisonment. A pet animal that is not brought into Northern Ireland in accordance with the relevant EU instruments will be subject to the quarantine provisions in the 1977 Order. The owner of the pet animal may also be subject to the offences in Article 16 of that Order. A pet animal that fails to meet the preventative health measures relating to Hendra or Nipah is prohibited entry into Northern Ireland. Part 5 provides a transitional arrangement for pet animals already detained and isolated in quarantine on the coming into force of this Order and deals with amendments to other legislation, principally the 1977 Order. The Schedule amends the 1977 Order to reduce the quarantine period for rabies-susceptible animals (other than animals subject to Article 5 or 8 of Regulation (EC) No 998/2003) from 6 months to 4 months and to give a discretionary power to the appropriate authorities to reduce or waive the 4 month quarantine period if satisfied that the release of an animal from quarantine will present negligible risk of the introduction of rabies into Northern Ireland.

Read the full note and every offence in this 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 0.90.

Basis
the provision says “it is an offence”; the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.90 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