Contravention of The Noise at Work Regulations 1989
the instrument as a whole of The Noise at Work Regulations 1989
- Status not determined
- Strict liability
- Set by another provision
- Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheries
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
Contravening this instrument is an offence under section 33(1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974. The instrument itself contains no offence-creating words.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
- Not determined
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.
Classifier’s reasoning: contravention offences of this kind are strict as to the breach; the fault position is governed by the parent Act and was not read from it.
What would breach the instrument as a whole?
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.
- Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Noise at Work Regulations 1989.
Penalty
- Mode of trial
- Set by another provision — the instrument states the penalty by reference to an Act or to another regulation
- Maximum fine
- Not determined
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
The instrument does not state a penalty itself. It sets one by reference to section 33(1)(c) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974.
the penalty is in the parent Act, not in this instrument.
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.
-
Sentencing organisations: fines and the means of a corporate defendant
All courts in England and Wales
How a fine on a company is arrived at from its turnover. Relevant far beyond the guidelines that state it, because a very large share of the offences in this corpus can only be committed by an organisation.
-
Environmental offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 July 2014
Covers unauthorised or harmful deposit, treatment or disposal of waste, illegal discharges to air, land and water, and the equivalent offences committed by organisations. It is the guideline that introduced turnover bands for corporate fines, so the size of the defendant company is a starting point rather than a mitigating detail.
-
Health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter and food safety and hygiene offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 February 2016
Covers breaches of duty under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the regulations made under it, and food safety and food hygiene offences. Sentencing turns on culpability and on the seriousness and likelihood of harm risked, not only on the harm that happened.
-
Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 June 2017
The sliding scale of credit for pleading guilty, from one third at the first stage of proceedings downwards.
-
General guideline: overarching principles
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2019
The guideline a court uses when there is no offence-specific guideline, which is the position for the overwhelming majority of offences created by statutory instrument. It sets out how culpability and harm are assessed from first principles.
-
Totality: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales
How to sentence more than one offence at once so that the total is just and proportionate - frequently in point here, because regulatory prosecutions commonly charge several breaches of the same instrument.
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
- 2 October 1989
- In force from
- 1 January 1990
- 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 give effect as respects Great Britain to provisions of Council Directive 86/188/EEC (OJ No. L137, 24.5.86, p.28) on the protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to noise at work. The Regulations– a impose requirements on employers with respect to the making and review of noise assessments (regulation 4); b impose requirements on employers with respect to the keeping of records of noise assessments and reviews thereof (regulation 5); c impose requirements on employers with respect to the reduction of risk of damage to the hearing of their employees from exposure to noise (regulation 6); d impose requirements on employers with respect to the reduction of exposure to noise of their employees (regulation 7); e impose requirements on employers with respect to the provision to their employees of personal ear protectors (regulation 8); f impose requirements on employers with respect to the marking of, and entry of their employees into, ear protection zones (regulation 9); g impose requirements on employers and employees with respect to the use and maintenance of equipment provided by employers pursuant to the provisions of the Regulations (regulation 10); h impose requirements on employers with respect to the provision of information, instruction and training to such of their employees as are likely to be exposed to specified noise levels (regulation 11); i modify section 6(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (c. 37) (general duties of designers, etc., of articles for use at work and articles of fairground equipment) so that any duty imposed by that subsection includes in specified circumstances a duty to provide certain information relating to noise generation (regulation 12); j provide for the issue of certificates of exemption by the Health and Safety Executive and the Secretary of State for Defence (regulations 13 and 14 respectively); and k revoke regulation 44 of the Woodworking Machines Regulations 1974 (S.I. 1974/903) (regulation 15). The duties imposed by the Regulations do not (in the circumstances specified in regulation 3(a)) extend to the masters and crews of sea-going ships or to their employers; nor do they (in the circumstances specified in regulation 3(b)) extend to the crews of aircraft and hovercraft or to other persons on board such craft.
Read the full note and every offence in this instrument
What Parliament said
Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.
-
Noise Levels (Work)
Commons · 24 March 1999 · Mr. Michael Clapham (Barnsley, West and Penistone)
I am pleased to have secured the debate because, although this may not be the sexiest of subjects, tens of thousands of workers are exposed to excessive noise levels every day. I am also pleased that the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield(Mr. Meale), is to respond. I know that before becoming a Member of Parliament he worked in industry,…
-
Industrial Deafness
Commons · 14 June 2000 · Mr. Bayley
I am afraid that I cannot advise on an individual case without knowing all the circumstances. I can only advise on the law. The Government believe that noise induced hearing loss caused by work is a serious and significant occupational health problem. As my hon. Friend said, exposure levels for many workers remain considerable: the Health and Safety Executive estimates that more than 1.25 million people in nearly…
-
Industrial Deafness
Commons · 14 June 2000 · Mr. Martin Salter (Reading, West)
I welcome the opportunity to bring the case of my constituent, Mr. James Fryer, of Purley in Reading, to the attention of the Chamber. Sadly, due to ill health, Mr. Fryer cannot be here to witness the results of his four-year struggle to obtain industrial injuries disablement benefit. However, it is obvious to me that there is a clear case for the legislation surrounding the IIDB qualifying criteria to be reviewed…
-
Deafened Service Veterans
Commons · 12 June 2007 · The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Derek Twigg)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship again, Miss Begg. I thank my neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley, South (Mr. O’Hara), for raising this topic, and congratulate him on having, as usual, set out the issues clearly and concisely. I know that he is a solid campaigner on such issues and takes great interest in health matters generally. I congratulate him on securing the debate and…
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 0.63.
- Basis
- the penalty comes from the enabling Act rather than from this instrument
- Confidence
- 0.63 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
- This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
- The Noise at Work Regulations 1989 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheriesOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 1989