UK Offence Report

Offences and penalties

regulation 8 of The Hormonal Substances (Food Sources) (Animals) Regulations 1991

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

8 If any person contravenes, or fails to comply with, any provision of a notice given to him under these Regulations, or contravenes regulation 7 above, he shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or on conviction on indictment to a fine.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
Legal burden on the defendant

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 gives a defence the defendant must prove, on the balance of probabilities. A legal burden of that kind can be read down to a merely evidential one under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 where placing it on the defendant would be disproportionate (R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37; Sheldrake v DPP [2004] UKHL 43).

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision.

The defence, as drafted

1 In any proceedings for an offence under these Regulations it shall be a defence for the person charged to prove that he took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of such an offence by himself or by a person under his control. 2 If in any case the defence provided by paragraph (1) above involves the allegation that the commi

What would breach regulation 8?

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 the thing the provision prohibits under the Hormonal Substances (Food Sources) (Animals) Regulations 1991, whatever the reason for doing it.
  2. Where the requirement is a positive duty, letting the time for performing it pass without performing it.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£2,000
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

expressed as the statutory maximum (the prescribed sum): the same words mean £5,000 in England and Wales and £10,000 in Scotland.

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 Animals, Meat and Meat Products (Examination for Residues and Maximum limits) Regulations 1991
Revoked on
8 January 1992
Made
5 July 1991
In force from
8 August 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

(This note is not part of the Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations enable an authorised officer of an enforcement authority (being the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Secretary of State for Health and the Secretary of State for Wales in relation to England and Wales and the Secretary of State for Scotland in relation to Scotland)– 1 to give notice in writing to the person in charge of an animal requiring him to detain the animal at the place where it then is until it has been inspected in order to ascertain whether it contains a prohibited substance (regulation 4); 2 were it appears on such an inspection that a prohibited substance is present in an animal, to give notice in writing to the person in charge of the animal prohibiting any commercial operations from being carried out in respect of it and prohibiting it from being moved from the place where it has been detained until such notice is withdrawn (regulation 5); and 3 where it appears on further investigation that a prohibited substance is present in an animal, to give notice in writing to the person in charge of the animal requiring it to be slaughtered in a specified manner and within a specified period (regulation 6(1)). The Regulations also prohibit the sale for human consumption and the disposal for human or animal consumption of an animal which has been slaughtered under them (regulation 7). The contravention or failure to comply with any provision of a notice given by an authorised officer and the contravention of regulation 7 are offences in respect of which a person is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or on conviction on indictment to a fine (regulation 8). For the purposes of the Regulations– a “animals” means domestic animals of the bovine species, swine, sheep, goats, solipeds and poultry, and wild animals of those species and wild ruminants which have been raised on a holding, and b “prohibited substance” means any hormonal substance the administration to an animal of which is prohibited by reference to the Medicines (Stilbenes and Thyrostatic Substances) Regulations 1982 or the Medicines (Hormone Growth Promoters) (Prohibition of Use) Regulations 1988.

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