Obstruction of officers
article 10 of The Third Country Fishing (Enforcement) Order 1996
- Revoked
- Requires proof of a state of mind
- Either way
- Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheries
The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.
What the provision says
10 Any person who, on any fishing boat which is within British fishery limits and to which a relevant Community provision applies— a fails without reasonable excuse to comply with any requirement imposed by a British sea-fishery officer under the powers conferred on British sea-fishery officers by article 6, 7 or 8 of this Order; or b without reasonable excuse prevents any other person from complying with any such requirement; or c assaults or intentionally obstructs an officer who is exercising any of those powers, shall be guilty of an offence and liable— i on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum; or ii 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
- 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
nd to which a relevant Community provision applies— a fails without reasonable excuse to comply with any requirement imposed by a British sea-fishery officer under the powers conferred on British sea-fishery officers by article 6, 7 or 8 of this Order; or b without reasonable excuse prevents any other person from complying with any such requir
What would breach article 10?
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 Third Country Fishing (Enforcement) Order 1996.
- 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
- Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
- Maximum fine
- £5,000
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
expressed as the statutory maximum (the prescribed sum): the same words mean £5,000 in England and Wales and £10,000 in Scotland.
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.
-
Environmental offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 July 2014
Covers unauthorised or harmful deposit, treatment or disposal of waste, illegal discharges to air, land and water, and the equivalent offences committed by organisations. It is the guideline that introduced turnover bands for corporate fines, so the size of the defendant company is a starting point rather than a mitigating detail.
-
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
- Revoked
- Revoked by
- The Third Country Fishing (Enforcement) Order 1997
- Revoked on
- 9 April 1997
- Made
- 3 April 1996
- In force from
- 24 April 1996
- 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 Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
This Order, which replaces and revokes the Third Country Fishing (Enforcement) Order 1995, as amended by the Third Country Fishing (Enforcement) (Amendment) Order 1995, provides for the enforcement of Community Regulations which authorise fishing in certain specified areas within member States' fishery limits for specified descriptions of fish by vessels of third countries, namely Norway and the Faroe Islands, in 1996. These Regulations contain requirements concerning fishing quotas and authorised zones, methods of fishing, the holding of licences and observance of licence conditions, the keeping of log books, the making of radio reports and similar matters. The Order makes breaches of specified articles of the Community Regulations (set out in column 1 of the Schedule to the Order) offences for the purposes of United Kingdom law where they occur within British fishery limits (article 3 and the Schedule to the Order). The offences created by the Order are triable summarily or on indictment. On conviction on indictment, the master, owner and charterer (if any) of an offending vessel will be liable to an unlimited fine. On summary conviction, the master, owner and charterer (if any) will be liable to a fine not exceeding the amount specified in relation to the offence in column 4 of the Schedule (see article 4(1)). The level of the maximum summary fine in respect of offences relating to fishing without or in excess of quota, or in unauthorised waters, methods of fishing, the keeping of logbooks and the observance of licence conditions is £50,000. The level of the maximum summary fine for all the other offences specified in the Schedule is the statutory maximum penalty (which is currently £5,000). In certain cases the master, owner and charterer (if any) of an offending vessel will also be liable to the forfeiture of any fish in respect of which the offence was committed (or, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the value of the fish) and to the forfeiture of nets or other fishing gear (article 4(2) to (4)). Additionally the Order— a contains provision concerning the recovery of fines (article 5), b confers powers of enforcement on British sea-fishery officers (articles 6 to 8), including provision for their protection (article 9), c provides for the punishment of anyone found guilty of obstructing or assaulting an officer (article 10), and d makes provision for the trial of offences (article 11) and the admissibility of logbooks and other documents (article 12).
Read the full note and every offence in this instrument
Other offences in the same instrument
- Where there is, in respect of any fishing boat to which a relevant Community provision applies, a…article 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 Third Country Fishing (Enforcement) Order 1996 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheriesOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 1996