UK Offence Report

Directions in preparation for a hearing

regulation 21(4) of The Special Educational Needs Tribunal Regulations 2001

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

4 A direction shall—

a include

a statement of the possible consequences for the appeal, as provided by regulation 25, of

a party’s failure to comply with the requirement within the time allowed by the President;

b if made under regulation 24(2), contain

a reference to the fact that, under section 336 of the 1996 Act, any person who without reasonable cause fails to comply with requirements regarding disclosure or inspection of documents shall be liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

3 on the standard scale; and

c unless the person to whom the direction is addressed had an opportunity to object to the direction, or he gave his written consent to the application for it, contain

a statement to the effect that that person may apply to the President under regulation

22 to vary or set aside the direction.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
failing to comply with a notice or direction
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 regulation 21(4)?

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. On these words an offence is committed where a person without reasonable cause fails to comply with requirements regarding disclosure or inspection of documents.
  2. Being served with a notice under the Special Educational Needs Tribunal Regulations 2001 and doing nothing by the date it specifies.
  3. Doing part of what the notice requires, where it required all of it.
  4. Disagreeing with the notice and ignoring it, rather than using whatever appeal the instrument provides.

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.

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 Special Educational Needs Tribunal for Wales Regulations 2012
Revoked on
6 March 2012
Made
27 February 2001
In force from
1 September 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 make provision in relation to the Special Educational Needs Tribunal established by section 333 of the Education Act 1996. In particular they deal with the making and determination of appeals to the Tribunal. They revoke the Special Educational Needs Tribunal Regulations 1995 but re-enact the provisions with amendments. The main differences between these Regulations and the 1995 Regulations are that: a The child who is the subject of the appeal now has the right to attend the hearing. In addition the local education authority have to ascertain the views of the child on the issues raised by the appeal (or give the reasons why it has not done so). (Regulations 13(2) and 30(2)). b The procedure is now in two stages rather than three. Once an appeal has been made, both parties have the same period of time in which to make their case. (Regulations 9 and 13). c Members of the lay panel are required to have knowledge or experience of special educational needs. (Regulation 3).

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 0.72.

Basis
the provision states liability on summary conviction; the provision states a penalty in older drafting
Confidence
0.72 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