UK Offence Report

Contravention of The Medicines (Medicated Animal Feeding Stuffs) Regulations 1989

the instrument as a whole of The Medicines (Medicated Animal Feeding Stuffs) Regulations 1989

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

Contravening this instrument is an offence under section

67 of the Medicines Act 1968. 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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.

  1. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Medicines (Medicated Animal Feeding Stuffs) 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 67 of the Medicines Act 1968.

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.

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 Medicines (Medicated Animal Feeding Stuffs) Regulations 1992
Revoked on
30 January 1992
Made
8 December 1989
In force from
1 January 1990
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 replace the Medicines (Medicated Animal Feeding Stuffs) Regulations 1988. The Regulations continue to prohibit a person, in the course of a business carried on by him, from incorporating a medicinal product (which now includes intermediate feed as defined in regulation 2(1)) unless (additionally) it is a licensed product, and it is incorporated in accordance with a product licence, an animal test certificate or a veterinary written directions given by a veterinary surgeon or veterinary practioner (regulation 3(1)(a) and (b)). In addition, a person can incorporate medicinal products in animal feeding stuffs if he is registered in the Register kept under the Regulations and, subject to specified conditions, intends to export such animal feeding stuffs (regulation 3(1)(c)). The Regulations continue to prohibit a person, in the course of a business carried on by him, from selling or supplying any animal feeding stuff in which a medicinal product, not being a prescription only medicine (that is to say, a medicinal product which may be sold or supplied by retail only in accordance with a prescription given by a veterinary surgeon or veterinary practitioner), has been incorporated or from importing any such animal feeding stuff unless the medicinal product was incorporated in the animal feeding stuff in accordance with a product licence, an animal test certificate or a veterinary written direction (regulation 4(1) and (2)). The Regulations continue to prohibit a person, in the course of a business carried on by him, from selling or supplying any animal feeding stuff in which a prescription only medicine has been incorporated or from importing any such animal feeding stuff except in accordance with a veterinary written direction, subject to certain exceptions (regulation 4(3) and (4)). As medicinal products not licensed for incorporation in animal feeding stuff (or without an appropriate animal test certificate) can no longer be incorporated in animal feeding stuffs pursuant to a veterinary written direction, consequential provisions in respect of the sale or supply of feeding stuffs requiring a certificate of analysis or a certificate of compliance with a monograph have been deleted and the content of the veterinary written direction has been modified. The Regulations continue to impose detailed requirements relating to registration in the Register, including provision for payment of fees and giving an undertaking to comply with a specified Code of Practice (regulation 1(2) and 6). (The Codes of Practice are priced publications and are available from MAFF Publications, London SE99 7TP). Additionally a defence is available to any person who, having exercised all due diligence, sells, supplies, imports or incorporates a medicinal product in an animal feeding stuff against a forged veterinary written direction (regulation 7).

Read the full note and every offence in this 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 0.67.

Basis
the penalty comes from the enabling Act rather than from this instrument
Confidence
0.67 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