Offences and penalties
regulation 12(2) of The Rural Development Grants (Agriculture) (No. 2) Regulations 1995
- Status not determined
- Requires proof of a state of mind
- Summary only
- Agriculture, plant health, food production and rural affairs
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
2 Any person who—
a fails, without reasonable excuse, to comply with
a requirement imposed by or under regulation
9 or by regulation 10;
b intentionally obstructs an authorised officer (or
a person accompanying and acting under his instructions) in the exercise of his powers under regulation 9, shall be guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction, to
a fine not exceeding level
3 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
- 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 (intentionally).
“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: intentionally; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).
The defence, as drafted
2 Any person who— a fails, without reasonable excuse, to comply with a requirement imposed by or under regulation 9 or by regulation 10; b intentionally obstructs an authorised officer (or a person accompanying and acting under his instructions) in the exercise of his powers under regulation 9, shall be guilty
What would breach regulation 12(2)?
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.
- Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Rural Development Grants (Agriculture) (No. 2) Regulations 1995.
- Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
- Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.
Penalty
- Mode of trial
- Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
- Maximum fine
- £1,000
- Standard scale
- Level 3
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
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.
-
Animal cruelty: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 July 2017
Covers cruelty to and neglect of animals, and the associated disqualification and deprivation orders.
-
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
- Status not determined
- Made
- 17 August 1995
- In force from
- 14 September 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 supplement the Community legislation listed in the Schedule to the Regulations (“the Community legislation”). The Community legislation provides, inter alia, for assistance to be granted from the Guidance Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (“Community assistance”) towards operations which promote rural development by facilitating the development and structural adjustment of certain rural areas, if such operations fall within a sub-programme set out in a Single Programming Document which has been approved by the Commission of the European Communities. These Regulations provide the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (“the Minister”) with the power to approve operations for the receipt of financial assistance, to attach conditions to any such approval (regulation 5) and pay financial assistance (regulation 3). The Regulations also set out the circumstances in which approval of an operation may be revoked and financial assistance paid to a beneficiary, in respect of that operation, may be recovered (regulation 11). The Regulations provide powers of entry and inspection to authorised persons in relation to land on which an approved operation is situated or documents relating to an approved operation are held (regulation 9) (“authorised person” is defined in regulation 2(1)). The Regulations also oblige beneficiaries of financial assistance to keep records relating to the approved operation for a certain period (regulation 10), to supply such information relating to the approved operations as the Minister requires (regulation 8), and to assist an authorised person in the exercise of his powers under regulation 9. The Regulations make it an offence to supply false or misleading information for the purposes of obtaining financial assistance (regulation 12). They also make it an offence intentionally to obstruct an authorised person in the exercise of his powers under regulation 9, and to fail (without reasonable excuse) to keep relevant records for the required period or to provide an authorised person with assistance. These Regulations revoke and replace the Rural Development Grants (Agriculture) Regulations 1995, which contained defects. Copies of the Commission Decisions listed in the Schedule to the Regulations and the Single Programming Documents which have been approved by the those Decisions may be inspected at the offices of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food at Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR (Tel: 0171 238 3000).
Read the full note and every offence in this instrument
Other offences in the same instrument
- Any person who, for the purposes of obtaining assistance for himself or any other person, knowingly or…regulation 12(1)
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 Rural Development Grants (Agriculture) (No. 2) Regulations 1995 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Agriculture, plant health, food production and rural affairsOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 1995