Penalties
regulation 32(1) of The Dairy Produce Quotas Regulations 1994
- Status not determined
- Requires proof of a state of mind
- Either way
- Food, consumer protection, trading standards, product safety and age-restricted sales
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 Any person who— a fails without reasonable excuse to comply with a requirement imposed on him by or under these Regulations or the Community legislation, or b in connection with these Regulations or the Community legislation, makes a statement or uses a document which he knows to be false in a material particular or recklessly makes a statement or uses a document which is false in a material particular, shall be guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or, on conviction on indictment, to a fine.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
- 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 (recklessly).
“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: recklessly; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).
The defence, as drafted
1 Any person who— a fails without reasonable excuse to comply with a requirement imposed on him by or under these Regulations or the Community legislation, or b in connection with these Regulations or the Community legislation, makes a statement or uses a document which he knows to be false in a material parti
What would breach regulation 32(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.
- Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Dairy Produce Quotas 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
- Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown 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 (1994-04-01); 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.
-
Imposition of community and custodial sentences: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales
When a community order or custody is justified at all, and the presumption against short custodial sentences.
-
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
- 9 March 1994
- In force from
- 1 April 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 Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
These Regulations revoke and replace the Dairy Produce Quotas Regulations 1993, as amended. They implement in the United Kingdom Council Regulation (EEC) No. 3950/92 (OJ No. L405, 31.12.92, p.1) establishing an additional levy in the milk and milk products sector and Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 536/93 (OJ No. L57, 20.3.93, p.12) establishing detailed rules for the levy, both as amended, which consolidate earlier legislation relating to the levy. Under the Community legislation (listed in Schedule 1), a levy continues to be payable on dairy produce sold by direct sale by a producer or delivered by him wholesale to a dairy business, unless the sales or deliveries are within a reference quantity described in that legislation. The Community legislation establishes the system of what are commonly called “milk quotas” and in these Regulations the term “quota” is used to refer to the reference quantity described in the Community legislation. The main changes are as follows: Minor changes have been made to certain of the definitions (regulation 2). A provision is introduced, pursuant to the Community legislation, to permit a transfer of quota without transfer of the corresponding land. In exceptional circumstances the Intervention Board may release a transferee of such quota from the restrictions applicable to such transfers (regulation 13). Provisions on the temporary transfer of quota are extended to any agreement between producers to make a temporary transfer of unused quota, as notified to the Intervention Board (regulation 15). The functions of the Intervention Board are extended to include those previously exercised by the milk marketing boards in respect of the preparation and maintenance of direct sales and wholesale registers, and purchaser notices (regulation 25). Direct sellers are required to register with the Intervention Board (regulation 27). Purchasers are required to provide such information to the Intervention Board, including statistics and forecasts of deliveries of milk, as will enable it to fulfil its functions under the Regulations and the Community legislation (regulation 29). Detailed provisions are included on the restoration of quota which has been confiscated (regulation 33). The Dairy Produce Quotas Regulations 1993 as amended, are revoked except in relation to the calculation of levy liability in respect of the 1993 to 1994 quota year (regulation 36). Changes have been made to the arbitration provisions to correspond to changes in the regulations, including the introduction of arbitration in respect of the restoration of confiscated quota (Schedules 2, 3 and 4). A compliance cost assessment has been prepared and a copy has been placed in the library of each House of Parliament.
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 Dairy Produce Quotas 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