UK Offence Report

Contravention of The Bluetongue (Scotland) Amendment (No. 2) Order 2008

the instrument as a whole of The Bluetongue (Scotland) Amendment (No. 2) Order 2008 (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

Contravening this instrument is an offence under section

73 of the Animal Health Act 1981. The instrument itself contains no offence-creating words.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
breaching the provision
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Not determined

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.

Classifier’s reasoning: contravention offences of this kind are strict as to the breach; the fault position is governed by the parent Act and was not read from it.

What would breach the instrument as a whole?

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. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Bluetongue (Scotland) Amendment (No. 2) Order 2008.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Set by another provision — the instrument states the penalty by reference to an Act or to another regulation
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

The instrument does not state a penalty itself. It sets one by reference to section 73 of the Animal Health Act 1981.

the penalty is in the parent Act, not in this instrument.

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
2 October 2008
In force from
4 October 2008
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 further amends the Bluetongue (Scotland) Order 2008 (“the principal Order”). The principal Order transposes Council Directive 2000/75/EC (“the Bluetongue Directive”) of 20th November 2000 laying down specific provisions for the control and eradication of bluetongue (O.J. No. L 327, 22.12.2000, p.74), and implements Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1266/2007 of 26th October 2007 on implementing rules for Council Directive 2000/75/EC as regards the control, monitoring, surveillance and restrictions on movements of certain animals of susceptible species in relation to bluetongue (O.J. No. L 283, 27.10.2007, p.37). The principal Order was previously amended by the Bluetongue (Scotland) Amendment Order 2008, the main focus of which was to make specific provision for vaccination of animals against bluetongue. This Order makes adjustments to the treatment of the various zones referred to in the principal Order, and makes adjustments to existing provision in relation to powers of veterinary inspectors, officers and inspectors. It also revises provisions relating to animal movements, including movement of vaccinated animals. Article 2(2) makes minor changes to provisions in the interpretation article of the principal Order. Article 2(3) has the effect that an inspector appointed by either the Scottish Ministers or a local authority has the power to require production of a licence authorising an animal movement in a disease control zone, and the consignment note relating to such a movement. Article 2(4) has the effect that the Scottish Ministers have a power to declare a temporary control zone in Scotland on suspicion of bluetongue on premises outside Scotland, whether or not such a zone has been declared in an adjoining territory. Article 2(5) has the effect that the Scottish Ministers may when they declare a control zone make it of such size as they consider necessary to reduce the spread of bluetongue, rather than a zone with a fixed radius of 20 kilometres as originally required by the principal Order. It also has the effect that the Scottish Ministers have power to declare a control zone in Scotland on confirmation of bluetongue on premises outside Scotland, whether or not such a zone has been declared in an adjoining territory. Article 2(6) replaces article 14 of the principal Order which made provision in relation to the declaration of protection and surveillance zones, and setting out the actions which could be taken within such zones. It has the effect that the Scottish Ministers are required to declare a restricted zone on confirmation of bluetongue in Scotland, of such size as they consider appropriate, and which may include separate protection and surveillance zones, rather than having to declare concentric protection and surveillance zones with a minimum radius of 100 and 150 kilometres respectively as originally required by the principal Order. It also has the effect that the Scottish Ministers have power to declare a restricted zone in Scotland on confirmation of bluetongue outside Scotland, whether or not such a zone has been declared in an adjoining territory. Article 2(7) omits article 15 of the principal Order, which made provision for the declaration of protection and surveillance zones where bluetongue is confirmed outside Scotland. This Order makes provision for the effect of disease outside Scotland through amendment of articles 11, 13 and 14 of the principal Order. Article 2(8), in order to take account of adjustments made by this instrument in relation to the treatment of zones, replaces article 16 of the principal Order, covering premises straddling zones, with a new article. Article 2(9) replaces the provisions in article 16A of the principal Order relating to the powers of veterinary inspectors, officers and inspectors introduced by the previous amending Order. The replaced provision involves some restructuring of the layout of article 16A, and redefines the powers that may be exercised by veterinary inspectors, officers and inspectors, respectively. Article 2(10) replaces existing provision relating to animal movements from a restricted zone, previously contained within article 19 of the principal Order, with separate articles, the first dealing with movements of animals from a restricted zone (article 19), and the second dealing specifically with the movement of vaccinated animals (article 19A). Article 19, as inserted by this Order, provides that where an animal that has been within a restricted zone in a member State at any time within the 60 day period before being moved to premises in a free area, the “receiving” occupier is required to notify the movement to the Scottish Ministers within 3 days of the animal arriving at the premises. An inspector can prohibit movement of any animal from the premises concerned other than under a licence. Article 19A as inserted by this Order provides that animals exempt from the exit ban from restricted zones provided by the Bluetongue Directive by virtue of point 5 of Part A of Annex III to the Commission Regulation (vaccinated animals), that have been within a restricted zone in a member State at any time within the 60 day period before being moved to premises in a free area or surveillance zone, must be accompanied by a veterinary certificate. It also has the effect that the definition of a veterinary certificate as originally provided for by the principal Order is extended to include a health certificate as required by the Commission Regulation in respect of animals intended for intra-Community trade, that is a health certificate as– i laid down in Council Directive 64/432/EEC on animal health problems affecting intra-Community trade in bovine animals and swine (O.J. No. L 121, 27.9.1964, p.1977/1964. Directive as last amended by Directive 2006/104/EC); ii laid down in Council Directive 91/68/EEC on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in ovine and caprine animals (O.J. No. L 146, 19.2.1991, p.9. Directive as last amended by Directive 2006/104/EC); iii laid down in Council Directive 92/65/EEC laying down animal health requirements governing trade in and imports into the Community of animals, semen, ova or embryos not subject to animal health requirements laid down in specific Community rules referred to in Annex A(1) to Directive 90/425/EEC (O.J. No. L 268, 14.9.1992, p.54. Directive as last amended by Commission Decision 2007/265/EC); or iv referred to in Commission Decision 93/444/EEC on detailed rules governing intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products intended for exportation to third countries (O.J. No. L 208, 19.8.1993, p.34), with the additional wording required under point 5 of Part A of Annex III to the Commission Regulation. Article 2(11) provides for removal of article 22A of the principal Order, which stated that no person could obtain vaccine unless authorised to do so.

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 0.55.

Basis
the penalty comes from the enabling Act rather than from this instrument
Confidence
0.55 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