UK Offence Report

Incorporation of Harbours, Docks and Piers Clauses Act 1847

article 6 of The Boston Harbour Revision Order 1989

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

6 As from the vesting day, the Harbours, Docks, and Piers Clauses Act 1847 (except sections 6 to 19, 24, 25, 31, the proviso to section 32, sections 42 and 48 to 50), so far as applicable to the purposes of and not inconsistent with the provisions of this Order, is hereby incorporated with this Order subject to the following modifications, that is to say:– a section 23 shall be read and have effect as if the words “provided that no such lease be granted for a longer term than three years” were omitted; b section 63 shall be read and have effect as if for the words from “liable to” to the end of the section there were substituted the words “be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 2 on the standard scale”; and c section 69 shall be read and have effect as if for the words from “shall forfeit” to the end of the section there were substituted the words “shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale”.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 article 6?

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 Boston Harbour Revision Order 1989.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£100
Standard scale
Level 2
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

this is the level 2 value when the instrument came into force (1989-11-07); the standard scale is keyed to the date the offence was committed, and for conduct today the same words mean £500.

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
19 June 1989
In force from
7 November 1989
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 Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

This Order designates Port of Boston Limited as the harbour authority for the Boston port, harbour and dock, and transfers to and vests in Port of Boston Limited the Boston port, harbour and dock undertaking together with all rights, interests and privileges presently vested in or used or enjoyed by the Boston Borough Council in relation to that undertaking. Provision is made for all purchases, sales, conveyances, deeds, contracts and agreements entered into or made by Boston Borough Council in relation to that undertaking to remain binding and in full force against or in favour of the Company and for all legal or other proceedings in relation to that undertaking to be carried on with the substitution of the Company as a party to the proceedings in lieu of the Council. The Order also provides for the repeal of certain provisions of certain Acts applying to the Council in respect of the undertaking. The applicants for the Order are the Boston Borough Council, Municipal Buildings, Boston, Lincolnshire PE21 8QR.

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 0.72.

Basis
the provision states liability on summary conviction; the provision states a penalty in older drafting
Confidence
0.72 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