UK Offence Report

Powers of authorised officers – salmonella control related requirements

regulation 13A(6) of The Eggs and Chicks (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2010

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

6 A person is guilty of an offence if that person—

a without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with any requirement imposed on that person by

a direction given by an authorised officer under paragraph (1);

b unless authorised to do so in writing by an authorised officer, tampers with any packs or containers that have been secured by an authorised officer under paragraph (2); or

c without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with any requirement imposed on that person by

a direction given by an authorised officer under paragraph (3).

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 comply with a notice or direction
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

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.

“Without reasonable excuse” here is an element of the offence rather than a defence, so its absence is for the prosecution to prove (R v Charles [2009] EWCA Crim 1570).

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

6 A person is guilty of an offence if that person— a without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with any requirement imposed on that person by a direction given by an authorised officer under paragraph (1); b unless authorised to do so in writing by an authorised officer, tampers with any packs or containers that have been secured by an

What would breach regulation 13A(6)?

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. Being served with a notice under the Eggs and Chicks (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2010 and doing nothing by the date it specifies.
  2. Doing part of what the notice requires, where it required all of it.
  3. Disagreeing with the notice and ignoring it, rather than using whatever appeal the instrument provides.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Not determined
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

no penalty is stated here: this instrument amends another one, and the penalty for the offence is in the instrument being amended.

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
16 December 2010
In force from
29 January 2011
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 Eggs and Chicks (Scotland) (No.2) Regulations 2008 (“the principal Regulations”). The amendments make new provision for the enforcement of directly applicable EU controls for salmonella serotypes with public health significance in relation to the marketing and use of eggs in shell for human consumption. They include provisions making the failure to comply with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No.2160/2003 (O.J.L325, 12.2.2003, p.1) of the European Parliament and of the Council on the control of salmonella and other specified food-borne zoonotic agents an offence, by inserting a new regulation12A in the principal Regulations (regulation7). Paragraph 1A of Schedule 2 to the European Communities Act 1972 is included in the enabling power for these Regulations. This is necessary because references are made in regulations 4, 9, 12, 13, 14 and 17 to EU instruments which are defined in the principal Regulations as meaning those EU instruments as amended from time to time. These Regulations also make amendments to and relevant to the Food Labelling Regulations 1996. These remove an ambiguity over the amendment to regulation45 made by paragraph2(b) of Schedule3 to the principal Regulations when read with regulation22(1) of those Regulations. A Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment has not been produced, as there will be no cost to business.

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