UK Offence Report

SCHEDULE 3

SCHEDULE 3 of The Food (Revision of Penalties) Regulations 1982 (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

PART I NEW REGULATION TO APPEAR IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH (IMPORTED MILK) REGULATIONS 1926 If any person contravenes or fails to comply with any of the foregoing provisions of these regulations he shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding £1,000.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 SCHEDULE 3?

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. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Food (Revision of Penalties) Regulations 1982, whatever the reason for doing it.
  2. 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
£1,000
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

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
1 December 1982
In force from
1 January 1983
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 a large number of regulations and orders relating to food so as to alter the penalties for offences against those regulations and orders. In many cases the mode of trial for prosecution of such offences is also altered. Apart from an amendment of one Northern Ireland instrument, the amendments extend to England and Wales only. Offences against the regulations listed in Schedule 1 continue to be summary offences. The maximum fine for such offences is increased to £1,000 (regulation 2(a)). Offences against the regulations listed in Schedule 2 become triable either way. The maximum fine on summary conviction of such offences is increased to £1,000. The maximum penalty on conviction on indictment is an unlimited fine or imprisonment for up to two years or both (regulation 3(a)). Regulations and orders made before 1st January 1956 (the date of commencement of the Food and Drugs Act 1955) are treated separately (regulation 4). Offences against the Public Health (Shell-Fish) Regulations 1934 become triable either way and subject to the same maximum penalties as offences against the regulations listed in Schedule 2 to these regulations. Offences against the other pre-1956 instruments amended by these regulations continue to be summary offences and become subject to the same maximum fine as offences against the regulations listed in Schedule 1 to these regulations. The Food and Drugs (Amendment) Act 1982 abolishes from 1st January 1983 imprisonment on summary conviction and daily fines for all offences against regulations and orders amended by these regulations, and words relating to those penalties are consequently now removed. The opportunity is also taken to remove from regulations amended by these regulations provisions which, because of the Food and Drugs (Amendment) Act 1982, would otherwise cease to have effect on 1st January 1983 (regulations 2(b) and 3(b)). All the amendments take effect on 1st January 1983.

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”; the provision states liability on summary conviction; the provision states a penalty in older drafting
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