UK Offence Report

6 Any person who contravenes regulation 2(1) or (2), 3(1), 4(1) or 5(1) shall be guilty of an offence…

regulation 6 of The Imported Food and Feedingstuffs (Safeguards against Cholera) Regulations 1991

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

6 Any person who contravenes regulation 2(1) or (2), 3(1), 4(1) or 5(1) shall be guilty of an offence triable only summarily, and liable on conviction to imprisonment for

a period not exceeding three months or to

a fine not exceeding level

5 on the standard scale or to both.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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

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

What would breach regulation 6?

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 contravenes regulation 2(1) or (2), 3(1), 4(1) or 5(1).
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Imported Food and Feedingstuffs (Safeguards against Cholera) Regulations 1991, 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
Not determined
Maximum fine
£2,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (1991-11-05); the standard scale is keyed to the date the offence was committed, and for conduct today the same words mean an unlimited fine.

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
31 October 1991
In force from
5 November 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 Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations prohibit (subject to certain exceptions) the importation into Great Britain of fish products (including fish and molluscs) which have been harvested or processed in Colombia, Ecuador or Peru, unless they are accompanied by appropriate documentation from the food control authorities in the country where they were harvested or prepared for sale. (Regulations 2 and 3 and the Schedules). They also prohibit absolutely the importation into Great Britain of bivalve molluscs from Peru and products of artisanal fisheries in Peru. (Regulation 2(1)). The prohibitions contained in regulation 2 give effect to Commission Decision 91/146/EECconcerning protective measures against cholera in Peru (OJ No. L73 20.3.91, p.34), as amended by Commission Decision 91/393/EEC (OJ No. L209 31.7.91, p.42) which modifies the prohibition in relation to certain processed rainbow trout. The exception from the prohibition on importation of fish products and molluscs from Ecuador and Colombia gives effect to Commission Decision 91/281/EEC concerning importations of fishery and aquaculture products from Ecuador (OJ No. L142 6.6.91, p.43) and Commission Decision 91/282/EEC concerning importations of fishery and aquaculture products from Colombia (OJ No. L142 6.6.91, p.44). ed by a certificate from CERPER as to the standards met bythe production plant and one from the Ministry of Health in Peru certifying the absence of Vibrio cholera in the consignment. (Regulation 4 and Schedule 3). The re-export from Great Britain to another Member State of fish products and bivalve molluscs which are from affected countries, and relevant fruit and relevant vegetables from Peru, and intended for human or animal consumption, is prohibited unless the receiving port or airport has facilities for the inspection of imports. This gives effect to Commission Decisions 91/146/EEC and 91/147/EEC concerning protective measures against cholera in Peru (OJ No. L73 20.3.91, p.34 and p.35 respectively), 91/281/EEC concerning importations of fishery and aquaculture products from Ecuador (OJ No. L142 6.6.91, p.43) and 91/282/EEC concerning importations of fishery and aquaculture products from Colombia (OJ No. L142 6.6.91, p.44). (Regulation 5). Contravention of the various prohibitions contained in the Regulations is an offence. (Regulation 6). Various provisions of the Food Safety Act 1990 are applied for the purposes of the Regulations. (Regulation 7). The Regulations are to be enforced in England and Wales by district councils, London borough councils and the Common Council of the City of London, and in Scotland by district and islands councils, except within the area of port health authorities or port local authorities, where they are instead to be enforced by those authorities. (Regulation 8). The Regulations also revoke the Imported Food (Peruvian Foodstuffs) Regulations 1991 which made other provision in respect of the importation of these products from Peru. (Regulation 9). The circular issued on 21st February 1991 by CERPER, the regulatory authority for fish products from Peru (compliance with which on the part of the factory of production is a prerequisite for the importation of most fish products from Peru), and a translation of the circular, may be obtained from the Departmental Library, Department of Health, Hannibal House, Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre, London SE1 upon payment of the standard charge imposed by the Library for photocopying (presently 14 pence per page).

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”
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