UK Offence Report

Judge advocate sitting alone

article 43(2) of The Courts-Martial (Royal Air Force) Rules 1997

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 If, while the judge advocate is sitting alone in accordance with these Rules,

a person commits an offence under section

57 or 101 of the Act, the judge advocate may report the occurrence to—

a the president; or

b if the offence is committed during preliminary proceedings and the person is subject to air force law, the commanding officer of that person.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
breaching the provision
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 person 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 43(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.

  1. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Courts-Martial (Royal Air Force) Rules 1997.

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
12 February 1997
In force from
1 April 1997
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 Rules) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Rules prescribe the procedure governing the prosecution and trial of offences at courts-martial under the Air Force Act 1955 (c. 19). The Rules generally accord with procedures in the Crown Court. They replace and revoke the Rules of Procedure (Air Force) 1972 (S.I. 1972/419) and take account of changes in the law and procedure since then, giving effect in particular to the provisions of the Armed Forces Act 1996 (c. 46). The Rules regulate the functions of the prosecuting authority and the court administration officer. The Rules provide for the form and preferring of charges, the discontinuance of proceedings before trial and the procedure to be followed by the court administration officer when convening the court-martial. The Rules provide for the first time for preliminary proceedings in the form of a hearing for directions, at which the judge advocate may make any necessary directions to secure the efficient trial of the case, and preparatory and pre-trial hearings at which the judge advocate may make rulings before the trial commences. Specific provision is made for the court-martial to resolve disputed issues of fact other than the accused’s guilt, where it is necessary to do so before deciding what sentence is to be passed. Rules relating to the admission of evidence via closed circuit television link and of video recording of testimony from child witnesses are included. A period of 28 days from the day sentence is announced is prescribed within which an accused may present a petition against finding or sentence or both to the reviewing authority, who is required to give reasons for his decision if such a petition is presented.

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 “commits an offence”; c10_offence_under_parent_act
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