UK Offence Report

False claims or evidence

rule 4.16(1) of The Insolvency (Scotland) Amendment Rules 2014 (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

1 If a creditor produces under Rule 4.15 a statement of claim, account, voucher or other evidence which is false— a the creditor shall be guilty of an offence unless the creditor shows that the creditor neither knew nor had reason to believe that the statement of claim, account, voucher or other evidence was false; b the company shall be guilty of an offence if the company— i knew or became aware that the statement of claim, account, voucher or other evidence was false; and ii failed as soon as practicable after acquiring such knowledge to report it to the liquidator.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 company
Conduct
making a false or misleading statement
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 company 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 rule 4.16(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. Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Insolvency (Scotland) Amendment Rules 2014.
  2. Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
  3. Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£10,000
Maximum prison (summary)
6 months
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

expressed as the statutory maximum (the prescribed sum): the same words mean £5,000 in England and Wales and £10,000 in Scotland.

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 April 2014
In force from
30 May 2014
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 Rules) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Rules amend the Insolvency (Scotland) Rules 1986 (S.I. 1986/1915) (“the Insolvency Rules”). The Rules restate provision in the Insolvency Rules in relation to receivership and the process of liquidation to remove the application of provisions of the Bankruptcy (Scotland) Act 1985. They also restate other Rules in relation to liquidation and administration for that purpose. Insofar as the Rules restate the law on reserved matters by virtue of paragraph 7 of Schedule 4 to the Scotland Act 1998 (c.46) the law as restated remains reserved law. The Rules also update and amend the Insolvency Rules in relation to receivership and the process of liquidation by new provision in relation to— block transfer orders for removal and appointment of liquidators (Rule 11) the remuneration of the liquidator (Rule 12) the liquidation committee (Rules 13 to 17) limited disclosure of statement of affairs in receivership (Rules 24 and 25) electronic submission and delivery of forms, notices and other documents (Rule 26) standard content of notices in Edinburgh Gazette or otherwise advertised (Rule 27) Rule 26 on electronic submission and delivery of documents makes provision in relation to receivership and the process of liquidation equivalent to that made for company voluntary arrangements and administration by the Insolvency (Scotland) Amendment Rules 2010 (S.I. 2010/688). See also the Legislative Reform (Insolvency) (Miscellaneous Provisions) Order 2010 (S.I. 2010/18) and the Explanatory Document published to accompany a draft of that Order (availablehere: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2009/9780111479391/memorandum/contents). The provision for electronic submission and delivery in these Rules is subject to contrary provision in the Insolvency Act 1986, for example, sections 95(2) and 98(1) (sending of notices by post) and section 436B(2) (provisions of the 1986 Act to which section 436B(1) does not apply). Rule 28 provides for the forms 4.9 (Scot) and 4.24 (Scot) in the Schedule to these Rules to be substituted for those forms as set out in Schedule 5 to the Insolvency Rules. Subject to Rule 29 (saving), the Rules apply from 30th May 2014. A Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment has been prepared for these Regulations. Copies can be obtained from the Accountant in Bankruptcy’s website: http://www.aib.gov.uk.

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 0.96.

Basis
the provision says a person is “guilty of an offence”
Confidence
0.96 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