UK Offence Report

Contravention of The Sheep and Goats Identification (England) Order 2000

the instrument as a whole of The Sheep and Goats Identification (England) Order 2000

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

Contravening this instrument is an offence under section

73 of the Animal Health Act 1981. The instrument itself contains no offence-creating words.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
Not determined

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.

Classifier’s reasoning: contravention offences of this kind are strict as to the breach; the fault position is governed by the parent Act and was not read from it.

What would breach the instrument as a whole?

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 Sheep and Goats Identification (England) Order 2000.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Set by another provision — the instrument states the penalty by reference to an Act or to another regulation
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

The instrument does not state a penalty itself. It sets one by reference to section 73 of the Animal Health Act 1981.

the penalty is in the parent Act, not in this instrument.

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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Sheep and Goats Identification and Movement (Interim Measures) (England) Order 2002 (revoked)
Revoked on
11 February 2002
Made
25 July 2000
In force from
1 September 2000
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 implements the provisions relating to sheep and goats of Council Directive 92/102/EEC on the identification and registration of animals (O.J. No. L355, 5.12.92, p.32), makes provision for records and other documentation concerning sheep and goats and for the marking of sheep and goats. It revokes the Sheep and Goats (Records, Identification and Movement) Order 1996, S.I. 1996/28. The Order requires any person who keeps sheep and goats to notify the Minister (article 3). The Order requires anyone keeping sheep or goats to keep movement records and, in the case of keepers who are sheepmeat producers for the purposes of Council Regulation 3493/90/EEC laying down general rules for the grant of premium to sheepmeat and goatmeat producers (O.J. No. L337, 4.12.90, p.7) additional records relating to specified events (articles 4 to 6). The Order makes provision for marking sheep and goats, either by an eartag or by a tattoo. Subject to certain exceptions and transitional provisions, from 1 January 2001 marking is required for all animals born or first moved off the holding of birth after that date and for all sheep and goats imported into England from outside the European Union (articles 7 to 9). The Order prohibits bringing sheep or goats into England from another member State or from another part of the United Kingdom, Channel Islands or Isle of Man unless they are marked (articles 10 and 11). The order requires marking sheep and goats when they are consigned to a destination outside Great Britain (article 12) and to a destination within Great Britain (article 13). It also provides for documentation to be carried when sheep or goats are moved within Great Britain (article 14). It makes provision for the removal and replacement of eartags and tattoos and the application of additional eartags and tattoos and prohibits the alteration of eartags and tattoos (articles 15 to 17). It also makes provision for the production of records (article 18). With the exception of article 5, which is enforced by the Minister, the Order is enforced by the local authority (article 19). Breach of any provisions of the Order is an offence under section 73 of the Animal Health Act 1981 punishable on conviction with a fine of level 5 on the standard scale (currently £5,000). A regulatory impact assessment has been made and a copy has been deposited in the library of each House of Parliament. Copies can be obtained from the Animal Health (Disease Control) Division of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 1A Page Street, London SW1P 4PQ.

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 0.55.

Basis
the penalty comes from the enabling Act rather than from this instrument
Confidence
0.55 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