False declarations.

paragraph 67(1) of SCHEDULE 2 of The Merchant Shipping Act 1988 (Bermuda) Order 1991

• Status not determined
• Requires proof of a state of mind
• Summary only
• Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harbours

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

1 If any person in the case of any declaration made in the presence of or produced to the Registrar of Shipping under this Part of this Act, or in any document or other evidence produced to that Registrar–

i wilfully makes, or assists in making, or procures to be made any false statement concerning the title to or ownership of, or the interest existing in any ship, or any share in

a ship; or

ii utters, produces or makes use of any declaration or document containing any such false statement knowing the same to be false, he shall be guilty of an offence and for each offence be liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding three thousand, five hundred dollars.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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

making a false or misleading statement

Fault element

Requires proof of a state of mind

Burden of proof

No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: wilfully.

What would breach paragraph 67(1) of SCHEDULE 2?

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. Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 (Bermuda) Order 1991.
2. Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
3. Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

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.

• 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.

• 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

Status not determined

Made

24 July 1991

In force from

22 August 1991

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 revokes and re-enacts with minor and drafting amendments the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 (Bermuda) Order 1989 (S.I. 1989/1334), which extended to Bermuda certain provisions of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988, subject to the modifications specified in Schedules 1 and 2. The 1989 Order had not been brought into force in Bermuda pursuant to the provisions of Article 7 thereof.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

Other offences in the same instrument

• Evidence on first registryparagraph 10(3) of SCHEDULE 2
• Custody of certificateparagraph 15(2) of SCHEDULE 2
• Provision for loss of certificateparagraph 18(3) of SCHEDULE 2
• Rules as to name of shipparagraph 47(8) of SCHEDULE 2
• Registry of alterationsparagraph 48(2) of SCHEDULE 2
• Forgery of documentsparagraph 66 of SCHEDULE 2
• False declarationsparagraph 67 of SCHEDULE 2
• False declarationsparagraph 67(2) of SCHEDULE 2
• Marking of shipparagraph 7(3) of SCHEDULE 2
• Marking of shipparagraph 7(5) of SCHEDULE 2
• Penalty for concealing British character of a shipparagraph 70 of SCHEDULE 2
• National colours for ships, and penalty on carrying improper coloursparagraph 73(2) of SCHEDULE 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 Merchant Shipping Act 1988 (Bermuda) Order 1991 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
• Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harboursOther offences on the same subject
• Offences created in 1991