UK Offence Report

Penalties

regulation 24(1) of The Merchant Shipping (Survey and Certification) Regulations 1995

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 If a ship to which these Regulations apply proceeds or attempts to proceed to sea or on a voyage or excursion without complying with the requirements of regulations 4 to 7 of these Regulations, the owner and master of the ship shall each be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine, or 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 master
Conduct
breaching the provision
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

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 master 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 gives a defence the defendant must prove, on the balance of probabilities. A legal burden of that kind can be read down to a merely evidential one under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 where placing it on the defendant would be disproportionate (R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37; Sheldrake v DPP [2004] UKHL 43).

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

The defence, as drafted

on by a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale. 7 It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under these Regulations to prove that he took all reasonable steps to ensure that the Regulations were complied with.

What would breach regulation 24(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 Merchant Shipping (Survey and Certification) Regulations 1995.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£1,000
Standard scale
Level 3
Maximum prison (summary)
6 months
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

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
28 April 1995
In force from
1 June 1995
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 repeal and revoke, as appropriate, and re-enact the requirements for the survey and certification of passenge ships and cargo ships previously contained in the following Acts and instruments: The Merchant Shipping Act 1894; The Merchant Shipping Act 1906; The Merchant Shipping (Safety and Load Line Conventions) Act 1932; The Merchant Shipping (Safety Convention) Act 1949; The Merchant Shipping Act 1964; The Fishing Vessels (Safety Provisions) Act 1970; The Merchant Shipping (Cargo Ship Construction and Survey) Regulations 1981; The Merchant Shipping (Cargo Ship Safety Equipment Survey) Regulations 1981; The Merchant Shipping (Passenger Ship Construction and Survey) Regulations 1984; The Merchant Shipping (Cargo Ship Construction and Survey) Regulations 1984; The Merchant Shipping (Radio and Radio-Navigational Equipment Survey) Regulations 1991. The Regulations give effect to the requirement as to surveys and the issue of certificates contained in the Safety of Life at Sea Convention 1974, as amended, and also contain similar requirements for ships not subject to the Convention. Other than the changes resulting from the consolidation of these requirements into a single set of regulations, the main changes from the previous provisions relate to the delegation of some passenger ship surveys to the Classification Societies, and to ships on international voyages ceasing to require a Passenger Certificate as well as a (SOLAS) Passenger Ship Safety Certificate, from 31st December 1995. The Regulations provide for appeals against surveys by an arbitration procedure, (regulation 25); and make consequential amendments in the Merchant Shipping Act 1894, the Fishing Vessels (Safety Provisions) Act 1970 and the Merchant Shipping Act 1979. Merchant Shipping Notices are obtainable from the Marine Information Centre, Marine Safety Agency, Spring Place, 105 Commercial Road, Southampton, Hampshire, SO15 1EG. The SOLAS Convention, its Protocol and amendments are obtainable from the International Maritime Organisation, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

What Parliament said

Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

Other offences in the same 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