UK Offence Report

Penalties

regulation 11(2) of The Merchant Shipping (Pilot Ladders and Hoists) Regulations 1987

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

2 An owner of a ship who contravenes regulations 5 or 8(1) or (4) shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1000 or, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years and a fine.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
an owner
Conduct
contravening a requirement of the instrument
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

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 an owner 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 gives a defence the defendant must prove, on the balance of probabilities. A legal burden of that kind can be read down to a merely evidential one under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 where placing it on the defendant would be disproportionate (R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37; Sheldrake v DPP [2004] UKHL 43).

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision.

The defence, as drafted

liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £50. 6 It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under these Regulations to prove that he took all reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence to ensure that the Regulations were complied with.

What would breach regulation 11(2)?

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 an owner contravenes regulations 5 or 8(1) or (4).
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Merchant Shipping (Pilot Ladders and Hoists) Regulations 1987, 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
£1,000
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined
Maximum prison (on indictment)
1 year

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 Merchant Shipping (Pilot Transfer Arrangements) Regulations 1999
Revoked on
10 February 1999
Made
18 November 1987
In force from
1 January 1988
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.

These Regulations revoke and re-enact, with amendments, the Merchant Shipping (Pilot Ladders and Hoists) Regulations 1980. The major amendments are: The owner is required to provide associated equipment and accommodation ladder (when applicable) in addition to the pilot ladder and to ensure that suitable positions are provided for securing the pilot ladder. The master is required to ensure that the associated equipment and the pilot ladder, accommodation ladder and hoist are in good order, efficient and used correctly. Provision of a defence to ensure that a person will not be liable to conviction of a criminal offence if he has done what he can to avoid committing the offence.

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