UK Offence Report

Information

article 15(1) of The Transport (Scotland) Act 2001 (Conditions attached to PSV Operator’s Licence and Competition Test for Exercise of Bus Functions) Order 2001

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 information is provided by

a person to the Director in connection with the Director’s functions under this Order, the person is guilty of an offence if–

a the information is false or misleading in

a material particular; and

b the person knows that it is or is reckless as to whether it is.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
making a false or misleading statement
Fault element
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: knows that.

What would breach article 15(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. Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001 (Conditions attached to PSV Operator’s Licence and Competition Test for Exercise of Bus Functions) Order 2001.
  2. Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
  3. Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (2001-07-25); the standard scale is keyed to the date the offence was committed, and for conduct today the same words mean an unlimited fine.

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
24 July 2001
In force from
25 July 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 Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

This Order makes provision consequential on the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001 (“the 2001 Act”). Article 3 amends section 26(1) of the Transport Act 1985 to provide additional grounds on which the traffic commissioner may attach conditions to a public service vehicle operator’s licence. These additional grounds are: (1) where an operator has operated a local service in contravention of a written undertaking given to the traffic commissioner in terms of a quality partnership scheme (section 8(4) of the 2001 Act); (2) where an operator has provided a local service during a period when a quality contract scheme is in place and that service is not part of that scheme (section 22(1)(b) of the 2001 Act); (3) where an operator has failed to make and implement the arrangements required by a ticketing scheme (section 32(1) of the 2001 Act) and (4) where an operator has failed to provide an authority or authorities with information required by them (section 34(3) of the 2001 Act). Articles 4 to 18 provide that the Director General of Fair Trading (“the Director”) will exercise the competition test provided for in section 37 of the 2001 Act. Section 37 applies to the functions of making and varying quality partnership schemes, making and varying ticketing schemes and inviting and accepting tenders for subsidised services. Articles 4 and 5 provide that an authority or operator may apply to the Director either before or after the exercise of the function for a decision on whether it will meet or has met the competition test. Articles 6 to 11 provide for the Director to investigate on the Director’s own initiative. For the purpose of an investigation the Director is given powers to obtain information and documents subject to provisions as to confidentiality. Any decision made on such an application or following such investigation must be published with reasons. Article 12 provides that if the Director has already decided that a function meets the competition test that no further action is to be taken unless there are reasonable grounds for believing that there has been a material change of circumstances or that the information on which the decision was based was incomplete, false or misleading. Article 13 provides that the Director may enforce the decisions by giving directions to the authorities or authorities. Article 14 provides that, subject to certain exceptions, information obtained by the Director shall not be disclosed during the lifetime of the individual (where it relates to the affairs of any individual) or while the particular business continues to be carried on. This article also provides that a contravention of this provision is an offence, punishable with a fine up to level 5 on the standard scale (currently £5,000). Article 15 makes it an offence, punishable with a fine up to level 5 on the standard scale to give the Director false or misleading information. Article 16 provides that, for the purposes of the law relating to defamation, the Director has absolute privilege in the exercise of the Director’s functions under this order. Article 17 provides for the Director to charge fees in connection with the Director’s functions under this Order.

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.

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