UK Offence Report

Protection of right to personal liberty

paragraph 3(1) of Schedule THE SCHEDULE TO THE ORDER of The Anguilla Constitution Order 1982

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

1 No person shall be deprived of his personal liberty save as may be authorised by law in any of the following cases, that is to say— a in consequence of his unfitness to plead to a criminal charge; b in execution of the sentence or order of a court, whether established for Anguilla or some other country, in respect of a criminal offence of which he has been convicted; c in execution of an order of the High Court or the Court of Appeal or such other court as may be prescribed by the Legislature on the grounds of his contempt of any such court or of another court or tribunal; d in execution of the order of a court made in order to secure the fulfilment of any obligation imposed on him by law; e for the purpose of bringing him before a court in execution of the order of a court; f upon reasonable suspicion of his having committed or of being about to commit a criminal offence under the law of Anguilla; g under the order of a court or with the consent of his parent or guardian, for his education or welfare during any period ending not later than the date when he attains the age of eighteen years; h for the purpose of preventing the spread of an infectious or contagious disease; i in the case of a person who is, or is reasonably suspected to be, of unsound mind, addicted to drugs or alcohol, or a vagrant, for the purpose of his care or treatment or the protection of the community; j for the purpose of preventing the unlawful entry of that person into Anguilla, or for the purpose of effecting the expulsion, extradition or other lawful removal of that person from Anguilla or for the purpose of restricting that person while he is being conveyed through Anguilla in the course of his extradition or removal as a convicted prisoner from one country to another; or k to such extent as may be necessary in the execution of a lawful order requiring that person to remain within a specified area within Anguilla or prohibiting him from being within such an area or to such extent as may be reasonably justifiable for the taking of proceedings against that person relating to the making of any such order, or to such extent as may be reasonably justifiable for restraining that person during any visit that he is permitted to make to any part of Anguilla in which, in consequence of any other such order, his presence would otherwise be unlawful.

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
breaching the provision
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 paragraph 3(1) of Schedule THE SCHEDULE TO THE ORDER?

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 what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Anguilla Constitution Order 1982.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Not determined
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

no penalty is stated in this instrument; it may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence.

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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Anguilla, Montserrat and Virgin Islands (Supreme Court) Order 1983
Revoked on
1 September 1983
Made
10 March 1982
In force from
1 April 1982
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, which is made under section 1(2) of theAnguilla Act 1980 and sections 6(1) and 17(4) of the West Indies Act 1967, confers a new constitution on Anguilla, supersedes the Anguilla (Constitution) Order 1976, which is revoked, and modifies the West Indies Associated States Supreme Court Order 1967 in its application to Anguilla.

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 “commits 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