UK Offence Report

25 A person shall be guilty of an offence who, without reasonable excuse, proof of which shall lie on him,…

article 25 of The Plant Health (Forestry) (Great Britain) 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

25 A person shall be guilty of an offence who, without reasonable excuse, proof of which shall lie on him, contravenes or fails to comply with any provision of article

24 and shall be liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

5 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
contravening a requirement of the instrument
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

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.

“Without reasonable excuse” here is an element of the offence rather than a defence, so its absence is for the prosecution to prove (R v Charles [2009] EWCA Crim 1570).

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised); other provisions of the same instrument use a mens rea word while this one does not (the Cundy v Le Cocq contrast).

The defence, as drafted

25 A person shall be guilty of an offence who, without reasonable excuse, proof of which shall lie on him, contravenes or fails to comply with any provision of article 24 and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.

What would breach article 25?

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 a person proof of which shall lie on him, contravenes or fails to comply with any provision of article 24.
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Plant Health (Forestry) (Great Britain) Order 1989, 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
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
Not determined
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

the level is stated but no money value is given: this instrument extends outside the United Kingdom, where the standard scale set by s.122(1) of the Sentencing Act 2020 does not run.

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
Status not determined
Made
4 May 1989
In force from
8 June 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, which applies to Great Britain, revokes and supersedes the Import and Export of Trees, Wood and Bark (Health) (Great Britain) Order 1980 and the Tree Pests (Great Britain) Order 1980. The Order implements Council Directive 77/93/EEC (as amended by the instruments listed in Schedule 6) on protective measures against the introduction into the Member States of the European Community of organisms harmful to forest trees, and contains additional provisions to prevent the spread of tree pests in Great Britain. The Order– a prohibits the landing of certain tree pests, trees, wood, isolated bark, used forestry machinery, soil, growing medium and genetically manipulated material and specifies conditions subject to which the landing of other specified trees, wood, isolated bark, soil and growing medium may be permitted (article 3); b prohibits the keeping, sale, planting, release, delivery or other disposal of certain tree pests, trees etc. and prohibits work involving genetic manipulation of a tree pest or genetically manipulated material (article 4); c contains various provisions concerning phytosanitary certificates, reforwarding phytosanitary certificates and mill certificates (articles 2, 3 and 5 to 11); d provides that certain parts of trees and wood etc. may be landed without a phytosanitary certificate if they are contained in the baggage of passengers or if they are directly consigned to Great Britain from Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man (article 7); e requires that certain trees, wood, isolated bark, soil and growing medium when exported to a Member State are to be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate or a reforwarding phytosanitary certificate (article 11); f requires notification of the presence of certain tree pests, trees, wood etc. (articles 12 and 13); g enables an inspector to take remedial or precautionary action where certain tree pests, trees, wood etc. are or are likely to be landed in contravention of the Order or where certain tree pests, trees, wood etc. are or are likely to be present on premises (articles 14 and 15); h enables an inspector to enter premises, to carry out examinations, mark and take samples and to take remedial action where the requirements of notices served under the Order have not been complied with (articles 17 and 19); i requires an inspector to obtain a warrant from a justice of the peace or a sheriff before entering a dwelling house (article 20); j provides that anything prohibited by the Order may be done under the authority of a licence (article 21); k provides that officers of Customs and Excise may detain trees, wood etc. for examination by an inspector (article 22); l enables an inspector to seek information in respect of certain tree pests, trees, wood etc. (article 23); m provides that the contravention of, or failure to comply with, any provisions of the Order (other than those relating to landing) shall be an offence punishable by a fine not exceeding £2,000 (articles 24 and 25). (Any person who lands articles in contravention of a prohibition imposed by this Order with intent to evade such prohibition is guilty of an offence under section 50(2) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (c. 2) and may be detained. A person guilty of such offence is liable, on summary conviction, to a penalty of £2,000 or of three times the value of the goods, whichever is the greater, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months, or to both, and, on conviction on indictment, to a penalty of any amount, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years, or to both.) In addition to numerous minor and drafting amendments, the Order makes the following changes of substance– the controls over wood have been extended to include wood chips, particles, sawdust, wood waste and scrap (article 2); the conditions laid down for the importation of certain trees from New Zealand have been set out in the Order as opposed to the previous practice of setting them out in licences (article 3 and Schedule 3, Part I); the use of mill certificates in place of phytosanitary certificates is permitted where their use has been authorized by the Forestry Commissioners in conjunction with the plant health services of the exporting countries (articles 3, 5 and 9 and Schedules 3 and 5); revised controls have been introduced in respect of the import of trees in tissue culture (articles 2 and 3 and Schedules 2 and 3); certain parts of trees and wood within specified quantities or numbers may be landed in a passenger’s baggage without a phytosanitary certificate or a mill certificate (article 7); re-exports of certain trees, wood etc. to Member States are now required to be accompanied by the phytosanitary certificate issued in the country of origin as well as a reforwarding phytosanitary certificate (article 11 and Schedule 4); notification of the presence of certain tree pests is required by persons who become aware of such presence in the course of their duties or business (article 12); notification by the responsible authority is required of the likely entry into, or presence in, a free zone of imported tree pests, trees etc. (article 13); entry to private dwellings may be obtained only under the authority of a warrant granted by a justice of the peace or a sheriff (article 20); the maximum fine which may be imposed for an offence under the Order has been increased to £2,000 (level 5 on the Standard Scale) (article 25); the Restriction on Movement of Spruce Wood Order 1982 has been amended so that it accords with this Order (article 27).

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 0.92.

Basis
the provision says a person is “guilty of an offence”; the provision states liability on summary conviction; the provision states a penalty in older drafting
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