UK Offence Report

Penalties and enforcement

regulation 7(1) of The Coffee Extracts and Chicory Extracts (Scotland) Regulations 2001

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

1 Any person who contravenes or fails to comply with any of the provisions of these Regulations 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
contravening a requirement of the instrument
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

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 gives a defence the defendant must prove, on the balance of probabilities. A legal burden of that kind can be read down to a merely evidential one under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 where placing it on the defendant would be disproportionate (R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37; Sheldrake v DPP [2004] UKHL 43).

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

The defence, as drafted

8 In any proceedings for an offence under these Regulations it shall be a defence for the person charged to prove that– a the food concerned was marked or labelled before 13th September 2001; and b the matters constituting the alleged offence would not have constituted an offence under the Coffee and Coffee Products (Scotland) Regulations 1979 if those Regulations had be

What would breach regulation 7(1)?

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 contravenes or fails to comply with any of the provisions of these Regulations.
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Coffee Extracts and Chicory Extracts (Scotland) Regulations 2001, 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)
Not determined

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
Status not determined
Made
15 February 2001
In force from
17 March 2001
Extent
S

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 extend to Scotland only, implement Directive 1999/4/EC of the European Parliament and the Council relating to coffee extracts and chicory extracts (OJ No. L 66,13.3.1999, p.26) They revoke and replace the Coffee and Coffee Products (Scotland) Regulations 1979, as amended. The Regulations– a prescribe definitions and reserved descriptions for coffee extracts and chicory extracts (regulation 2 and the Schedule); b provide for the Regulations to apply to coffee extracts and chicory extracts ready for delivery to the ultimate consumer or to a catering establishment, except for the product known as café torrefacto soluble (regulation 3); c prohibit the labelling of food with a reserved description other than food to which the description relates (regulation 4); d require reserved descriptions and specified declarations to be applied to designated products, and prescribe the manner of marking or labelling to be employed; certain provisions of the Food Labelling Regulations 1996, which govern the labelling of coffee extract and chicory extract products except so far as specifically provided for in these Regulations, are applied to these specific requirements (regulations 5 and 6); e provide for penalties and enforcement, include a transitional provision and a defence in relation to exports (in accordance with Articles 2 and 3 of Council Directive 89/397/EEC (OJ No. L 186, 30.6.89, p. 23) on the official control of foodstuffs), apply various provisions of the Food Safety Act 1990 and make amendments and revocations (regulations 7 to 11). A Regulatory Impact Assessment, which includes a compliance cost assessment of the effect that these Regulations would have on business costs, has been prepared and has been placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre. Copies may be obtained from the Food Standards Agency, 6th Floor, St Magnus House, 25 Guild Street, Aberdeen AB11 6NJ.

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