UK Offence Report

Records of decisions etc.

regulation 43(4) of The Non-Domestic Rating (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1990

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

4 If without reasonable excuse

a person having custody of records intentionally obstructs

a person in exercising the right conferred by paragraph (3) he shall be liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

l 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
obstructing an official exercising a power
Fault element
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (intentionally).

“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: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: intentionally; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

4 If without reasonable excuse a person having custody of records intentionally obstructs a person in exercising the right conferred by paragraph (3) he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level l on the standard scale.

What would breach regulation 43(4)?

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. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Non-Domestic Rating (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1990.
  2. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
  3. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

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
13 March 1990
In force from
1 April 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 concern the alteration of non-domestic rating lists (which come into force under the Local Government Finance Act 1988 on 1st April 1990) by valuation officers, proposals from other persons for such alterations, and for appeals to valuation and community charge tribunals where there is disagreement about an alteration between a valuation officer and another person making a proposal for the alteration of a list. Part II deals with the time from which an alteration is to have effect (regulations 4 to 6), the manner in which a valuation officer notifies other persons of an alteration made by him (regulation 8), proposals for alterations by other persons (regulations 9 and 10) and the procedure following the making of such proposals (regulations 11 to 16). Part III applies the provisions of Part II, modified as appropriate, to cross-country pipe-lines which are required to be shown on central rating lists. Part IV makes provision for the alteration of central rating lists in relation to hereditaments the rateable values of which are specified in or determined under orders made by the Secretary of State under paragraph 3(2) of Schedule 6 to the 1988 Act. Part V makes provision for the procedure in relation to appeals where there is disagreement about the alteration of rating lists, about the validity of proposals for their alteration, against completion notices under Schedule 4A to the 1988 Act and against amounts certified by the valuation officer under Schedule 7A (non-domestic rating in 1990-1995) to the 1988 Act. Part Vl provides for the manner in which notices under the Regulations may be served, and for the retention of records by valuation officers and valuation and community charge tribunals (regulations 47 and 48). Regulation 49 prescribes the description of information to be supplied to valuation officers by charging authorities. Regulation 50 amends the Valuation and Community Charge Tribunals Regulations 1989 so that the valuation officer can be joined as a party to community charge appeals, and decisions in rating cases which bear on prior decisions in appeals relating to the standard community charge may be reviewed by the valuation and community charge tribunal concerned.

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 0.72.

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