UK Offence Report

Penalties

regulation 31(1) of The Dairy Produce Quotas Regulations 1997

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

1 Any person who— a fails without reasonable excuse to comply with a requirement imposed on him by or under these Regulations or the Community legislation, or b in connection with these Regulations or the Community legislation, makes a statement or uses a document which he knows to be false in a material particular or recklessly makes a statement or uses a document which is false in a material particular; or c disposes of quota which he knows or might reasonably be expected to know is incorrectly registered in his name, shall be guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or, 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
making a false or misleading statement
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 (recklessly).

“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: recklessly; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

1 Any person who— a fails without reasonable excuse to comply with a requirement imposed on him by or under these Regulations or the Community legislation, or b in connection with these Regulations or the Community legislation, makes a statement or uses a document which he knows to be false in a material parti

What would breach regulation 31(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. Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Dairy Produce Quotas Regulations 1997.
  2. Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
  3. Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (1997-04-01); the standard scale is keyed to the date the offence was committed, and for conduct today the same words mean an unlimited fine.

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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Dairy Produce Quotas (Scotland) Regulations 2002
Revoked on
31 March 2002
Made
11 March 1997
In force from
1 April 1997
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 Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations revoke and replace the Dairy Produce Quotas Regulations 1994, as amended. They implement in the United Kingdom Council Regulation (EEC) No. 3950/92 (OJ No. L405, 31.12.92, p.1) establishing an additional levy in the milk and milk products sector and Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 536/93 (OJ No. L57, 20.3.93, p.12) establishing detailed rules for the levy, both as amended, which consolidate earlier legislation relating to the levy. Under the Community legislation (including the legislation listed in Schedule 1), a levy continues to be payable on dairy produce sold by direct sale by a producer or delivered by him wholesale to a dairy business, unless the sales or deliveries are within a reference quantity described in that legislation. The Community legislation establishes the system of what are commonly called “milk quotas” and in these Regulations the term “quota” is used to refer to the reference quantity described in the Community legislation. Apart from drafting changes and the revocation of spent provisions, the new provisions included in these Regulations are as follows: A variation in the ring fencing of Scottish Islands areas (as defined in regulation 2(1)) is made by permitting temporary transfers of quota which increase quantities available to dairy enterprises within them (regulation 13(4)). Any special quota within the meaning of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2055/93 (OJ No. L187, 29.7.93, p.8), held by a producer who, before 31st December 1997, makes a temporary transfer of any quota held by him, is to be taken into the national reserve for the duration of the quota year in which that temporary transfer takes place (regulation 13(5)). A producer who is awarded a temporary reallocation of quota under regulation 14(2)(b)(i) or (2)(b)(ii) of these Regulations is to have his award calculated on the basis of a maximum of 16 litres per qualifying cow per qualifying day in any quota year (regulation 14(3)(a)). The date by which a producer who wishes to convert quota temporarily in any quota year from wholesale to direct sales quota or the other way must submit his application to do so to the Intervention Board has changed from 28th April to 14th May in any quota year following the end of the quota year in which the temporary conversion of quota takes place (regulation 16(3)(b)). A producer who permanently converts quota in any quota year is not permitted in that same quota year to transfer out quota of the same type as that which he has converted whether temporarily or otherwise (regulation 16(4)), but this restriction does not apply, in the quota year commencing 1st April 1997, to producers who have had animals forming part of their dairy herd slaughtered as animals having been exposed to bovine spongiform encephalopathy, in accordance with section 32(1)(b) of the Animal Health Act 1981 (1981 c. 22) (regulation 16(5)). A provision is introduced defining and extending the powers of authorised officers of the Intervention Board to include a power to enter upon a holding in order to ascertain whether an offence under regulation 31(1)(a), (b) or (c) of these Regulations has been or is being committed, to inspect any record or document relating to milk production (including a document kept by means of a computer), and to seize and retain such document or record if he has reason to believe that it may be required in evidence in criminal proceedings under these Regulations (regulation 30). Provisions are introduced making it a criminal offence to dispose of quota which a producer has reason to believe is incorrectly registered in his name, to intentionally obstruct an authorised officer in the exercise of his powers under regulation 30(4) and (5) of these Regulations or to fail without reasonable excuse to comply with a requirement of an authorised officer pursuant to regulation 30(4) or (5) of these Regulations (regulation 31). A compliance cost assessment has been prepared and a copy has been placed in the library of each House of Parliament.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

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