What would breach article 34(2) of The Leeds Supertram (Extension) Order 2001?

Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Leeds Supertram (Extension) Order 2001, whatever the reason for doing it. Where the requirement is a positive duty, letting the time for performing it pass without performing it.

Maintenance of approved works, etc.

Q: Is article 34(2) of The Leeds Supertram (Extension) Order 2001 a strict liability offence?

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.

article 34(2) of The Leeds Supertram (Extension) Order 2001

Status not determined
Strict liability
Summary only
Housing, planning, heritage and land

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 without reasonable cause the provisions of paragraph (1) above are contravened, the Executive shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to
a fine not exceeding level
3 on the standard scale.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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: contravening a requirement of the instrument
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 34(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.

Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Leeds Supertram (Extension) Order 2001, whatever the reason for doing it.
Where the requirement is a positive duty, letting the time for performing it pass without performing it.

Penalty

Mode of trial: Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine: £1,000
Standard scale: Level 3
Maximum prison (summary): Not determined

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.

Environmental offences: definitive guideline Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 July 2014
Covers unauthorised or harmful deposit, treatment or disposal of waste, illegal discharges to air, land and water, and the equivalent offences committed by organisations. It is the guideline that introduced turnover bands for corporate fines, so the size of the defendant company is a starting point rather than a mitigating detail.
Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 June 2017
The sliding scale of credit for pleading guilty, from one third at the first stage of proceedings downwards.
General guideline: overarching principles All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2019
The guideline a court uses when there is no offence-specific guideline, which is the position for the overwhelming majority of offences created by statutory instrument. It sets out how culpability and harm are assessed from first principles.
Totality: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales
How to sentence more than one offence at once so that the total is just and proportionate - frequently in point here, because regulatory prosecutions commonly charge several breaches of the same instrument.

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: 28 January 2001
In force from: 29 March 2001
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 Order authorises the West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive to construct works and compulsorily to acquire land for the purpose of extending the tramway system authorised by the Leeds Supertram Act 1993 between Leeds City Centre and Seacroft in the City of Leeds. A copy of the deposited plans and sections and the book of reference may be inspected free of charge during working hours at the offices of the West Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, Wellington House, 40–50 Wellington Street, Leeds LS1 2DE.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

What Parliament said

Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

Leeds Supertram (Extension) Order Lords · 7 March 2001
The report by the Chairman of Committees and the Chairman of Ways and Means in the House of Commons, pursuant to Section 3(5) of the Statutory Orders (Special Procedure) Act 1945, that no petitions had been presented against the Leeds Supertram (Land Acquisition and Road Works) Order 2001 nor against the Leeds Supertram (Extension) Order 2001 was laid before the House and ordered to lie on the Table.

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

This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
The Leeds Supertram (Extension) Order 2001 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
Housing, planning, heritage and landOther offences on the same subject
Offences created in 2001