UK Offence Report

Special health mark

regulation 32A(5) of The Food Hygiene (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2012

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

5 A person who contravenes or fails to comply with paragraphs (2), (3) or (4) is 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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 states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

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

What would breach regulation 32A(5)?

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 paragraphs (2), (3) or (4).
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Food Hygiene (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2012, 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
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
29 February 2012
In force from
1 April 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 Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations amend the Food Hygiene (Scotland) Regulations 2006 (“the 2006 Regulations”) by updating the definitions of certain EU instruments that are referred to in those Regulations and providing that a reference to those EU instruments shall be an ambulatory reference to them as any annex to them is amended from time to time. In addition, these Regulations extend the availability of remedial action notices, provide for compensation on successful appeal and provide for an identification mark for certain minced meat and other meat products. These Regulations amend the 2006 Regulations to update the definitions of certain EU instruments by— a substituting definitions of certain EU instruments for the definitions of the EU instruments that currently appear after the definition of “the Community Regulations” in paragraph (1) of regulation 2 (interpretation) (regulation 2(2)); b adding a provision that any reference to an EU instrument defined in Schedule1 is a reference to that instrument as any annex to it is amended from time to time (regulation2(3)); and c substituting a revised Schedule 1 (definitions of EU legislation) for the existing Schedule1 (regulation 2(7)). These Regulations further amend the 2006 Regulations by— a permitting the service of a remedial action notice in relation to an establishment not subject to approval under European food hygiene legislation (regulation 2(4)); b providing for compensation to be payable to a food business operator for loss suffered by complying with a remedial action notice, which is subsequently cancelled by a court on appeal (regulation 2(5)); and c adding a new Schedule 6A (regulation 2(8)) which specifies the requirements for the special health mark referred to in paragraph 9 of Chapter VI of Section I of AnnexIII to Regulation 853/2004 and paragraph 7 of Chapter III of SectionI of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No. 854/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption, and providing for the use of that mark and that failure to comply is an offence (regulation2(6)). Full business and regulatory impact assessments of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector have been prepared and placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre. Copies may be obtained from the Food Standards Agency (Scotland), 6th Floor, St Magnus House, 25 Guild Street, Aberdeen AB11 6NJ and online at www.legislation.gov.uk.

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