UK Offence Report

Obstruction

regulation 9(1) of The Beef Labelling (Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2000

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.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 intentionally obstructs any person acting in the execution of these Regulations;

b without reasonable cause, fails to give any person acting in execution of these Regulations any assistance or information which that person may reasonably require of him for the purpose of carrying out his functions under these Regulations; or

c furnishes to any person acting in the execution of these Regulations any information which he knows to be false or misleading, 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 person
Conduct
obstructing an official exercising a power
Fault element
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (intentionally).

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: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: intentionally.

The defence, as drafted

below, be a defence for the person charged to prove that he took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of the offence by himself or by a person under his control. 2 If in any case the defence provided by paragraph (1) above involves the allegation that the commission of the offence was due to an act or default of another person, or to r

What would breach regulation 9(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. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Beef Labelling (Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2000.
  2. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
  3. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Beef and Veal Labelling Regulations 2008 (revoked)
Revoked on
19 January 2009
Made
13 November 2000
In force from
1 January 2001
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 provide for the enforcement in England of— a in respect of beef derived from animals slaughtered on or after 1st September 2000, Title II of Regulation (EC) No. 1760/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a system for the identification and registration of bovine animals and regarding the labelling of beef and beef products (OJ No. L204, 11.8.00, p. 1) and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1825/2000 laying down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No. 1760/2000 as regards the labelling of beef and beef products (OJ No. L216, 26.8.00, p. 8); and b in respect of beef derived from animals slaughtered before 1st September 2000, Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1141/97 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No. 820/97 as regards the labelling of beef and beef products (OJ No. L 165, 24.6.97, p. 7). The Regulations, which revoke and replace the Beef Labelling (Enforcement) Regulations 1998 (S.I. 1998/616) in so far as they apply in England, provide for the enforcement of the compulsory and voluntary beef labelling schemes established by the above Community instruments. Regulation 3 provides that the Minister is the competent authority for the purposes of those schemes, while regulation 4 sets out enforcement authorities. By regulation 5 it is made an offence for persons engaged in the marketing of beef to fail to comply with the applicable requirements of the compulsory and voluntary beef labelling schemes. It is also made an offence to fail to comply with the requirements of a notice served by an authorised officer requiring the removal from sale of beef which has been wrongly labelled and marketed. These offences are punishable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £5,000 (regulation 13(1)). The Regulations also confer powers of entry, inspection, sampling and seizure on authorised officers (regulations 6 and 7) and make provision for the protection of officers acting in good faith (regulation 8). Regulation 9 creates offences in respect of the obstruction of any person acting in the execution of the Regulations, offences which may be punishable on summary conviction by a fine not exceeding £5,000 or imprisonment of up to three or six months (regulation 13(2) and (3)). Further provision is made in respect of offences due to the fault of another person (regulation 10), offences by bodies corporate (regulation 11) and the defence of due diligence (regulation 12). A Regulatory Impact Assessment has not been prepared in respect of these Regulations.

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