Any person who— a without reasonable excuse, refuses or fails within the time and in the manner specified…

paragraph 5 of SCHEDULE of The Haiti (United Nations Sanctions) (Isle of Man) Order 1994

• Status not determined
• Requires proof of a state of mind
• International sanctions, export control and trade restrictions

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

5 Any person who—

a without reasonable excuse, refuses or fails within the time and in the manner specified (or, if no time has been specified, within

a reasonable time) to comply with any request made under this Schedule by any person who is empowered to make it; or

b wilfully furnishes false information or

a false explanation to any person exercising his powers under this Schedule; or

c otherwise wilfully obstructs any person in the exercise of his powers under this Schedule; or

d with intent to evade the provisions of this Schedule, destroys, mutilates, defaces, secretes or removes any document, 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 person

Conduct

obstructing an official exercising a power

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 (wilfully, with intent to).

“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: wilfully, with intent to; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

5 Any person who— a without reasonable excuse, refuses or fails within the time and in the manner specified (or, if no time has been specified, within a reasonable time) to comply with any request made under this Schedule by any person who is empowered to make it; or b wilfully furnishes false informatio

What would breach paragraph 5 of SCHEDULE?

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. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Haiti (United Nations Sanctions) (Isle of Man) Order 1994.
2. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
3. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

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.

• Fraud, bribery and money laundering offences: definitive guideline Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2014

  Covers fraud, false accounting, bribery and money laundering, including offences committed by organisations.

• 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

18 May 1994

In force from

23 May 1994

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, made under the United Nations Act 1946, re-enacts with certain modifications, the provisions of the Haiti (United Nations Sanctions) (Isle of Man) Order 1993 (S.I. 1993/1794) and imposes further restrictions pursuant to a decision of the Security Council of the United Nations in Resolution No. 917 of 6th May 1994, on the export of goods to Haiti and the supply of goods to persons connected with Haiti, and on the importation of goods from Haiti. It restricts certain related activities including the carriage of prohibited goods in ships, aircraft and vehicles. The Order also prohibits aircraft, except for scheduled passenger aircraft, from taking off from, landing in or flying over the Isle of Man if they are destined for, or have taken off from, Haiti. It also restricts the making of payments under any bond in respect of a contract the performance of which is unlawful by virtue of the Order, and prohibits making or obtaining payments under certain indemnities in respect of such bonds.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

Other offences in the same instrument

• Application of articles 6, 7, 9 and 10article 11(2)
• Powers to demand evidence of destination which goods reacharticle 12
• Any person who has done any act under the authority of a licence or permission granted by the Treasury under…article 13
• If for the purpose of obtaining any licence or permission under this Order any person makes any statement or…article 13(1)
• Any person who has done any act under the authority of a licence or permission granted by the Treasury under…article 13(2)
• Declaration as to goods: powers of searcharticle 14(2)
• Declaration as to goods: powers of searcharticle 14(3)
• Investigation, etc. of suspected ships, aircraft and vehiclesarticle 15(10)
• Prohibition of flightsarticle 3(2)
• Powers of airport operatorarticle 4(3)
• Carriage of goods destined for Haitiarticle 8(3)

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 Haiti (United Nations Sanctions) (Isle of Man) Order 1994 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
• International sanctions, export control and trade restrictionsOther offences on the same subject
• Offences created in 1994