False statements
regulation 12 of The Organic Farming (Aid) Regulations 1994
- Revoked
- Requires proof of a state of mind
- Summary only
- Food, consumer protection, trading standards, product safety and age-restricted sales
The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.
What the provision says
12 If any person, for the purposes of obtaining for himself or any other person any aid, knowingly or recklessly makes
a statement which is false in
a material particular, that person shall be guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction, to
a fine not exceeding level
5 on the standard scale.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 (knowingly, knowingly or recklessly, recklessly).
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: knowingly, recklessly, knowingly or recklessly.
What would breach regulation 12?
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.
- Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Organic Farming (Aid) Regulations 1994.
- Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
- 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
- £5,000
- Standard scale
- Level 5
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (1994-07-22); 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.
-
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
- Revoked
- Revoked by
- The Organic Products (Wales) Regulations 2002
- Revoked on
- 31 December 2002
- Made
- 29 June 1994
- In force from
- 22 July 1994
- 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 apply to England and Wales and make provision for the paymentof aid to farmers who undertake to introduce organic farming methods, pursuant toArticle 2(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2078/92 (OJ No. L215, 30.7.92, p.85). The Regulations— a enable the Minister to make payments of aid, limited to 300 hectares per holding and subject to specified restrictions, to applicants satisfying the conditions of and applying in accordance with the regulations and specify the rate of aid (regulation 3); b specify the conditions of eligibility to be satisfied by applicants for aid (regulation 4); c specify the requirements in relation to applications for aid and the documents to accompany such applications (regulation 5); d require the Minister to notify applicants of the acceptance of applications and other specified details (regulation 6); e specify restrictions on the acceptance of applications by the Minister (regulation 7); f make provision for payment of aid to a new occupant where there has been a change in the occupation of a holding or part of a holding due to the death of a beneficiary or otherwise (regulation 8); g specify that payment of aid will be made in arrear (regulation 9); h require an applicant to permit an authorised person to enter premises and inspect premises, documents and records and to give reasonable assistance to the authorised person (regulation 10); i specify circumstances in which the Minister may withhold aid or recover payments already made (regulation 11); and j create the making of a false statement an offence and make provision for dealing with offences committed by corporations (regulations 12 and 13). The UKROFS standards are published and copies are obtainable from the Office of the Secretary to UKROFS, Room 320(c), Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR.
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
- This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
- The Organic Farming (Aid) Regulations 1994 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Food, consumer protection, trading standards, product safety and age-restricted salesOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 1994