UK Offence Report

Lifting Plant

regulation 11(2) of The Merchant Shipping (Hatches and Lifting Plant) Regulations 1988

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

2 Contravention of regulation 4(1), (2), (3) or (4), 5, 6(1), (2), (3), or (4), 7, 8, 9 or 10 by a master shall be an offence punishable only on summary conviction by a fine not exceeding £1000.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 master
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 master 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 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. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Merchant Shipping (Hatches and Lifting Plant) Regulations 1988, 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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Merchant Shipping and Fishing Vessels (Lifting Operations and Lifting Equipment) Regulations 2006
Revoked on
24 November 2006
Made
21 September 1988
In force from
1 January 1989
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 give effect in part to the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention 1976 (International Labour Organisation Convention 147) (Cmnd 7163), laid before Parliament on 24th April 1978 and ratified by the United Kingdom on 28th November 1980 which is in force internationally and requires provisions to be made substantially equivalent to those of (amongst other Conventions) the Prevention of Accidents (Seafarers) Convention 1970 (International Labour Organisation Convention 134, Article 4) (Cmnd 4800) which is in force but has not been ratified by the United Kingdom. The Regulations, with other provisions, will also allow ratification by the UK of the Convention and a recommendation concerning occupational safety and health in dock work (International Labour Organisation Convention 152) (Cmnd 8118) laid before Parliament in December 1980 and in force internationally. These Regulations will with others also allow the repeal of the Docks Regulations 1934 (S.R. & O. 1934 No. 279) in respect of those provisions relating to dock operations by ships crews. The Regulations require that hatch covernings are soundly constructed and used in a safe manner (Regulation 4). The Regulations also require the sound construction of lifting plant and equipment for supporting loads, lifting attachments which form an integral part of the load or slings, and the safe use of lifting plant by trained operators (Regulation 6). They provide for the testing (Regulation 7) and thorough examination (Regulation 8) of lifting plant with the retention of appropriate certificates (Regulation 10) as well as the relevant marking of plant and lifting gear (Regulation 9). In the case of ships not registered in the United Kingdom the Regulations require that ships which do not conform to the standards of health and safety required by these regulations may be detained. Chapters 17 and 18 of the Code of Safe Working Practices, referred to in regulations 5 and 4(1) respectively, are set out in Merchant Shipping Notices Nos. M1347 and M1346. Merchant Shipping Notices are obtainable from the Department of Transport Marine Library, Sunley House, Holborn, London WC1V 6LP or from any Department of Transport Marine Office. The command papers containing I.L.O. Conventions 147 and 134, Cmnd 7163 and Cmnd 4800, are no longer in print, but photocopies of them may be obtained through Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. Copies of I.L.O. Conventions may also be obtained from the U.K. Office of the I.L.O., 96/98 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4YL.

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 0.88.

Basis
the provision says the conduct “is an offence”; the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.88 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