UK Offence Report

SCHEDULE 1

SCHEDULE 1 of The Western Isles Islands Council (Breasclete) Harbour Revision Order 1992

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) (2) Section Amendment 3, Proviso (iv) Leave out proviso (iv) and insert new proviso (iv) as follows:—

iv Section

63 shall be read and have effect as if for the words from ‘liable to’ to the end of the section there were substituted the words ‘guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

2 on the standard scale’. 3, Proviso (v) Leave out proviso (v) and insert new proviso (v) as follows:—

v Section

69 shall be read and have effect as if for the words from ‘shall forfeit’ to the end of the section there were substituted the words ‘shall be liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

3 on the standard scale’. 8(2) Leave out “£200” and insert “the statutory maximum”. 10(2) Leave out “£200” and insert “the statutory maximum”.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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

  1. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Western Isles Islands Council (Breasclete) Harbour Revision Order 1992.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£100
Standard scale
Level 2
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

this is the level 2 value when the instrument came into force (1992-07-09); the standard scale is keyed to the date the offence was committed, and for conduct today the same words mean £500.

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
21 May 1992
In force from
9 July 1992
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 transfers to and vests in the Western Isles Islands Council the Breasclete Harbour undertaking on the west coast of Lewis in the Western Isles Islands Area together with all rights, interests and privileges presently vested in or used by Highlands and Islands Enterprise in relation to that undertaking. Highlands and Islands Enterprise are the present undertakers at Breasclete by virtue of section 22 of the Enterprise and New Towns (Scotland) Act 1990 which transferred the harbour undertaking from the Highlands and Islands Development Board to them. Provision is made for all conveyances, contracts, agreements or deeds entered into by Highlands and Islands Enterprise in relation to that undertaking to remain binding and in full force against or in favour of the Council and for all legal or other proceedings in relation to that undertaking to be carried on with the substitution of the Council as a party to the proceedings in lieu of Highlands and Islands Enterprise. This Order also provides that sections 202 and 203 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 shall apply to byelaws for the harbour undertaking made by the Council and that byelaws and regulations in force when this Order comes into operation shall continue in force. This Order being subject to special parliamentary procedure, the provisions of the Statutory Orders (Special Procedure) Acts of 1945 and 1965 determine the date upon which it comes into force. The applicants for this Order are the Western Isles Islands Council, Sandwick Road, Stornoway, PA87 2BW.

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