Medical examinations required in the interests of others
article 37(2) of The Detention Centre Rules 2001
- Status not determined
- Objective fault
- Immigration and identity documents
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 A detained person who has been required to submit to a medical examination shall, so far as is reasonably practicable, be asked to consent to the examination and be informed by the examining medical practitioner— a that he is being required to submit to a medical examination in accordance with Schedule 12 to the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999; b of the nature of the disease from which there are reasonable grounds to believe he is suffering; and c that a refusal, without reasonable excuse, to submit to the medical examination is an offence under that Act.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 detained person
- Conduct
- breaching the provision
- Fault element
- Objective fault
- Burden of proof
- An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove
The prosecution must prove that the conduct happened and that it fell below the standard the provision sets. That is an objective test - what a reasonable person in the same position would have done, not what this defendant actually thought.
What a detained person personally believed or intended is not the question; the standard is what was reasonable.
“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: objective standard in the offence-creating words: so far as is reasonably practicable, reasonably practicable; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).
The defence, as drafted
e grounds to believe he is suffering; and c that a refusal, without reasonable excuse, to submit to the medical examination is an offence under that Act.
What would breach article 37(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 what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Detention Centre Rules 2001.
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.
-
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
- 29 January 2001
- In force from
- 2 April 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 note is not part of the Rules) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
These Rules make provision for the regulation and management of detention centres. They provide for matters such as the welfare and privileges of detained persons, their religious observance, correspondence, health care and any complaints they wish to make, as well as the use of security measures such as powers of search and removal from association in certain circumstances. The Rules also provide for the duties of detainee custody officers. In addition, the Rules make provision as to the making of visits by members of the Visiting Committee and for the making of reports by them to the Secretary of State.
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.
-
Illegal Migration Bill
Lords · 12 July 2023 · Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con)
My Lords, as ever, the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, was ahead of me, and clearly I should address the amendments in this group. I have already moved Motion E, which is: “That this House do not insist on its Amendment 8.” With the leave of the House, I shall speak also to Motions J, K, L, M and N. The Government have considered carefully the concerns raised in your Lordships’ House about the detention of unaccompanied…
-
Illegal Migration Bill
Lords · 17 July 2023 · Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con)
My Lords, I beg to move Motion B that this House do not insist on its Amendment 9B to which the Commons have disagreed for their Reason 9C. I will also speak to Motions C, D and E. Amendment 9B was rejected by the Commons for the second time earlier today by an increased majority. The elected House agrees that declaring asylum and certain human rights claims to be inadmissible is a core part of the scheme provided…
-
Immigration (Guidance on Detention of Vulnerable Persons) Regulations 2024
Lords · 14 October 2024 · Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
My Lords, these regulations were introduced by the previous Government, so a take-note Motion seemed more appropriate than a regret Motion as there was no time to debate them before the election. I am very grateful to my noble friend the Minister for meeting me to discuss them when he had hardly had time to breathe in his new role. My understanding is that the Government will look at them again as part of a wider…
-
Campsfield Immigration Removal Centre
Commons · 8 December 2025 · The Minister for Border Security and Asylum (Alex Norris)
I am today announcing that Campsfield immigration removal centre in Oxfordshire has opened. Detention plays a crucial role in maintaining effective immigration control and securing our borders. It is right that those with no right to remain in the UK are removed if they do not leave voluntarily. Campsfield IRC will be operated in line with the statutory framework established by the Immigration Act 1971 and the…
Other offences in the same instrument
- Medical examinations required in the interests of othersarticle 37(2)(c)
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 0.62.
- Basis
- the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
- Confidence
- 0.62 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 Detention Centre Rules 2001 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Immigration and identity documentsOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 2001