UK Offence Report

Offences and penalties

regulation 23(1) of The Merchant Shipping (Marine Equipment) Regulations 1999

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

1 If equipment is carried on

a ship otherwise than in compliance with regulation 6(1) above, the owner and master of the ship shall each be guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction by

a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum and on conviction on indictment by imprisonment for

a term not exceeding two years or

a fine, or both.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 master
Conduct
breaching the provision
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

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 master 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 gives a defence the defendant must prove, on the balance of probabilities. A legal burden of that kind can be read down to a merely evidential one under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 where placing it on the defendant would be disproportionate (R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37; Sheldrake v DPP [2004] UKHL 43).

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

The defence, as drafted

4 In any proceedings for an offence under these Regulations it shall be a defence for the person charged to prove that he took all reasonable steps to avoid the commission of the offence.

What would breach regulation 23(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. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Merchant Shipping (Marine Equipment) Regulations 1999.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

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.

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
6 July 1999
In force from
5 August 1999
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 implement Council Directive 96/98/EC on Marine Equipment (O.J. No. L46, 17.2.97, p. 26 as amended by Commission Directive 98/85/EC, O.J. No. L315, 25.11.98, p. 14). The principal provisions of the Regulations are as follows: i equipment to be placed on board UK ships and other ships of specified Classes on or after 5th August 1999 shall comply with the applicable international standards of relevant international conventions (regulation 6(1)); ii compliance with the applicable international standards shall be assessed solely by reference to the testing standards specified in Merchant Shipping Notice MSN 1734 and to the EC conformity-assessment procedures specified in the Regulations (regulation 6(2)); iii requirements of the EC conformity-assessment procedures (regulations 11 to 18); iv the creation of a criminal offence of affixing the mark of conformity to equipment (see regulation 18) otherwise than in conformity with the Regulations, tampering with or altering such a mark or placing on the market, supplying or exposing or offering for supply any equipment which bears a mark affixed otherwise than in conformity with the Regulations or which no longer complies with the applicable international standards (regulation 20); v the creation of a criminal offence (as respects both the owner and master of the ship) of the breach of the provisions of the Regulations in respect of the placing on board ships of equipment which does not comply with the Regulations (regulation 21). A compliance cost assessment has been produced and a copy placed in the library of both Houses of Parliament. Copies can be obtained from the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, Spring Place, 105 Commercial Road, Southampton SO15 1EG (telephone number: 01703 329186). Copies of the relevant international conventions can be obtained from the International Maritime Organisation, 4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 75R. Copies of Merchant Shipping Notices can be obtained from Eros Marketing Support Services Ltd., Unit B, Imber Court Trading Estate, Orchard Lane, East Molesey, Surrey KT8 0BN (telephone number: 0181 957 5028).

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”; the provision says the conduct is “punishable”
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