UK Offence Report

Prohibitions and offence

regulation 3(3) of The Animal Feedingstuffs from Belgium (Control) (Scotland) Regulations 2000

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

3 Any person who knowingly contravenes paragraph (1) above is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

5 on the standard scale or imprisonment for

a term not exceeding three months.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
contravening a requirement of the instrument
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 3(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.

  1. On these words an offence is committed where a person knowingly contravenes paragraph (1) above.
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Animal Feedingstuffs from Belgium (Control) (Scotland) Regulations 2000, whatever the reason for doing it.
  3. Where the requirement is a positive duty, letting the time for performing it pass without performing it.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
3 months

in Scotland a reference to a level is construed as referring to the standard scale as it currently stands (CP(S)A 1995 s.225(2)), 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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Animal Feedingstuffs from Belgium (Control) (Scotland) Revocation Regulations 2000
Revoked on
21 June 2000
Made
24 January 2000
In force from
17 February 2000
Extent
S

How this was established: the instrument was revoked by a later instrument found in this corpus.

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 apply to Scotland, revoke and re-enact with certain changes, the Animal Feedingstuffs from Belgium (Control) (No. 2) (Scotland) Regulations 1999 (S.S.I. 1999/33) (“the revoked Regulations”) and implement in Scotland, in relation to products for animal feeding, Commission Decision 1999/788/EC on protective measures with regard to contamination by dioxins of certain products of porcine and poultry origin intended for human or animal consumption (OJ No. L310, 4.12.1999, p.62). Like the revoked Regulations, these Regulations define ‘controlled entity’ (regulation 1(3)), prohibit (subject to exceptions (regulation 2)) the carrying out of specified operations in relation to controlled entities (regulation 3), specify the enforcement authorities (regulation 4) and apply with modifications provisions of the Food Safety Act 1990 (regulation 5). In addition to making minor changes to the revoked Regulations, these Regulations, by referring to Decision 1999/788/EC, make the following changes of substance– a they extend only to products derived from pigs and poultry; b the controls imposed relate only to products derived from animals slaughtered, or eggs laid, before 20th September 1999; c they alter the certification requirements for controlled entities imported from Belgium; and d the requirements as to return to Belgium now only apply to products derived from animals slaughtered, or eggs laid, before 20th September 1999.

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 0.92.

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