UK Offence Report

Amendment of the Brucellosis (Scotland) Order 2009

article 2(8) of The Brucellosis (Scotland) Amendment Order 2014

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

8 After paragraph (5) insert—

6 It is an offence for

a person, without lawful authority or excuse, proof of which shall lie on that person, to fail to comply with paragraph (1), (1A), (2) or (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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 do something the instrument requires
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 lawful excuse (an element).

The defence, as drafted

fter paragraph (5) insert— 6 It is an offence for a person, without lawful authority or excuse, proof of which shall lie on that person, to fail to comply with paragraph (1), (1A), (2) or (3).

What would breach article 2(8)?

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. Not doing what the provision requires under the Brucellosis (Scotland) Amendment Order 2014, by the time it requires it to be done.
  2. Doing it, but not in the manner or to the standard the instrument specifies.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
6 months

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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Brucellosis (Scotland) Amendment (No. 2) Order 2014
Revoked on
31 March 2014
Made
27 February 2014
In force from
1 April 2014
Extent
Not stated

How this was established: the instrument was revoked by a later instrument found in this corpus.

What the instrument is for

(This note is not part of the Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

This Order amends the Brucellosis (Scotland) Order 2009 (“the 2009 Order”) which implements Council Directive 64/432/EEC on animal health problems affecting intra-community trade in bovine animals and swine (OJ 121, 29.7.1964, p.164) in so far as it relates to the operation of a monitoring and testing programme for brucellosis. Article 2 of this Order amends article 7 of the 2009 Order. From 1st April 2014, it places a duty on owners or keepers of bovine animals who sell processed milk or milk products to take a quarterly sample of milk from all bovine animals whose milk is available for sale and submit these to an approved laboratory for testing for evidence of the existence of brucellosis. Failure to comply with the article is an offence. The enforcement provisions set out at articles 24 and 25 of the 2009 Order apply to these provisions. Article 3 of this Order revokes the Diseases of Animals (Extension of Definitions) Order 1971 (S.I. 1971/531) in so far as it applies to Scotland. A Business Regulatory Impact Assessment has been prepared and placed in the Scottish Parliament Information Centre. Copies can be obtained from the Scottish Government Agriculture, Food and Rural Communities Directorate, Animal Health and Welfare Division, Saughton House, Broomhouse Drive, Edinburgh, EH11 3XD.

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 0.90.

Basis
the provision says “it is an offence”; the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.90 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