UK Offence Report

Relaxation of restrictions on use of machines for amusement purposes

article 7(6) of The Deregulation (Gaming Machines and Betting Office Facilities) Order 1996

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

6 After that subsection there shall be inserted— 6A Subject to subsection (11) of this section, where subsection (5A) of section 34 of this Act is contravened, the holder of the betting office licence in respect of the premises shall be guilty of an offence. 6B Subject to subsection (11) of this section, where, in the case of any premises falling within paragraph (a) or (b) of subsection (5E) of section 34 of this Act— a that subsection, or b a condition to which the permit is subject, is contravened, the holder of the permit shall be guilty of an offence. .

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 holder
Conduct
breaching a condition of a licence, permit or consent
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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 holder 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 states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

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

What would breach article 7(6)?

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. Holding a valid licence but doing the thing it allows outside the hours, place or limits its conditions set under the Deregulation (Gaming Machines and Betting Office Facilities) Order 1996.
  2. Failing to do something a condition positively requires - a record, a notification, a monitoring step - even though the licensed activity itself is carried on properly.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Not determined
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

no penalty is stated in this instrument; it may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence.

No penalty was determined from this instrument. It may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence. Absence of a figure here is not evidence that the offence carries no penalty.

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
23 May 1996
In force from
20 June 1996
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 Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

This Order is made under section 1 of the Deregulation and Contracting out Act 1994. It reduces restrictions on business in three areas. Articles 3 and 4 amend the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act 1963 to increase the facilities ancillary to betting which may be provided in a licensed betting office. Article 5 increases the number of jackpot gaming machines which may be used in premises licensed or registered under the Gaming Act 1968 from the present limit of two. Article 6 relaxes the restrictions on use of machines for amusement purposes in the Gaming Act 1968 by permitting a cash-only machine which gives a maximum prize of £10 in premises to which children have restricted access. Articles 7 to 10 make various consequential and transitional provisions.

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.

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 0.96.

Basis
the provision says a person is “guilty of an offence”
Confidence
0.96 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