What would breach regulation 5(1) of The Sea Fishing (Days in Port) Regulations 1991?

Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Sea Fishing (Days in Port) Regulations 1991. Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading. Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

1 If the master, the owner or any charterer of a vessel to which these Regulations apply— a without…

Q: Is regulation 5(1) of The Sea Fishing (Days in Port) Regulations 1991 a strict liability offence?

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

regulation 5(1) of The Sea Fishing (Days in Port) Regulations 1991

Revoked
Requires proof of a state of mind
Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheries

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

1 If the master, the owner or any charterer of
a vessel to which these Regulations apply—
a without reasonable excuse contravenes any provision of regulation 4(1) or 4(5); or
b in purporting to give information required by virtue of regulation 4(3), (4) or (5) makes
a statement which he knows to be false in
a material particular or recklessly makes
a statement which is false in
a material particular, he shall be guilty of an offence.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 master
Conduct: making a false or misleading statement
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 (recklessly).

“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: recklessly; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

y charterer of a vessel to which these Regulations apply— a without reasonable excuse contravenes any provision of regulation 4(1) or 4(5); or b in purporting to give information required by virtue of regulation 4(3), (4) or (5) makes a statement which he knows to be false in a material particular or recklessly makes a statement which is false

What would breach regulation 5(1)?

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.

Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Sea Fishing (Days in Port) Regulations 1991.
Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

Penalty

Mode of trial: Not determined
Maximum fine: Not determined
Maximum prison (summary): Not determined

no penalty is stated in this instrument; it may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence.

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: Revoked
Revoked by: The Sea Fishing (Days in Port) Regulations 1992
Revoked on: 31 January 1992
Made: 30 January 1991
In force from: 1 February 1991
Extent: Not stated

How this was established: the instrument was revoked by a later instrument found in this corpus.

What the instrument is for

These Regulations make provision for the enforcement throughout the United Kingdom of Article 13 of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 3926/90, fixing for certain fish stocks and groups of fish stocks, the total allowable catches for 1991 and certain conditions under which they may be fished (OJ No. L378, 31.12.90, p. 1). These Regulations apply to fishing vessels registered in the United Kingdom whose overall length exceeds 10 metres and whose landings of cod and haddock from Areas IV (North Sea) and VI (West of Scotland) during the period 1st January 1989 to 30th June 1990 exceeded 100 tonnes and 40% by weight of their landings. They also apply to vessels that replace such vessels (regulation 3 and Schedule 1). Vessels are required to stay in port for 8 consecutive days each calendar month commencing with 1st February 1991 and ending with 31st December 1991 (regulation 4(1)). Unless prior notification, is given of that period, and where that period is to be spent in a non-UK port, certain particulars are furnished to a British sea-fishery officer, a period in port will not count for the purposes of paragraph (1) (regulation 4(2) and (4) and Schedule 2). Written notice must be given at least 12 hours in advance of the commencement of the period in port (regulation 4(3)). After the commencement of a notified period in port a vessel must remain in port until expiry of that period unless notice has been given (regulation 4(5)). Offences and associated penalties are created by regulations 5 and 6 respectively and regulation 8 confers powers of enforcement on British sea-fishery officers.

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.

Sea Fisheries Commons · 5 March 1991 · Mr. Archy Kirkwood (Roxburgh and Berwickshire)
On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The House is aware that the previous debate related to the amending regulations to the original Sea Fishing (Days in Port) Regulations 1991 (S.I. 1991, No. 139). Having regard to the fact that some Opposition Members and other hon. Members were extremely dissatisfied, and continue to be less than satisfied, about the ministerial response, will you confirm, Mr. Deputy…

Other offences in the same instrument

Any person who— a assaults a British sea-fishery officer who is exercising any of the powers conferred on…regulation 5(2)

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”
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

This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
The Sea Fishing (Days in Port) Regulations 1991 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheriesOther offences on the same subject
Offences created in 1991