UK Offence Report

Restrictions on dumping in the sea

paragraph 1(6) of SCHEDULE 1 of The Dumping at Sea Act 1974 (Overseas Territories) Order 1975

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

6 Subject to subsections (7) to (9) below, any person who contravenes subsection (1) above shall be guilty of an offence and liable—

a on summary conviction to

a fine of not more than £400 or to imprisonment for

a term of not more than six months or to both; or

b on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for not more than five years, or

a fine, or to both.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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; other provisions of the same instrument use a mens rea word while this one does not (the Cundy v Le Cocq contrast).

What would breach paragraph 1(6) of SCHEDULE 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. On these words an offence is committed where a person contravenes subsection (1) above.
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Dumping at Sea Act 1974 (Overseas Territories) Order 1975, 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
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£400
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

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 Environment Protection (Overseas Territories) Order 1988
Revoked on
21 July 1988
Made
12 November 1975
In force from
10 December 1975
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 Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

This Order extends the provisions of the Dumping at Sea Act 1974, subject to exceptions, adaptations and modifications, to the territories specified in Schedule 2 thereto and to the Solomon Islands. The purposes of the Act were to give effect to the Convention on the Dumping of Wastes at Sea (Cmnd. 5169) opened for signature at London on 29 December 1972; and for connected purposes.

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