UK Offence Report

Charges and Expenses

paragraph 14 of Schedule PIG INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT SCHEME 2000 of The Pig Industry Development Scheme 2000 (Confirmation) 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

14 Sections 14(2) and (3) (offences in relation to registration, returns and records), 23 (powers of entry) and 24 (disclosure of information) of the 1967 Act shall apply for the purposes of the pig levy scheme as they apply for the purposes of

a levy scheme under section

13 of that Act except that— 14.1 any person who commits an offence in contravention of sections 14(3) and 24(3) shall not be liable save on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding the prescribed sum or to

a maximum term of imprisonment not exceeding three months or both; and 14.2 references in section

23 to livestock shall be read as references to pigs.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 paragraph 14 of Schedule PIG INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT SCHEME 2000?

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. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Pig Industry Development Scheme 2000 (Confirmation) Order 2001, whatever the reason for doing it.
  2. 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
£5,000
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

expressed as the statutory maximum (the prescribed sum): the same words mean £5,000 in England and Wales and £10,000 in Scotland.

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
13 March 2001
In force from
14 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 note is not part of the Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

By this Order the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the National Assembly for Wales, acting jointly, and with the consent of the Scottish Ministers, confirm the Pig Industry Development Scheme (2000) (“the Development Scheme”). The Development Scheme, which applies to Great Britain and is made by the Meat and Livestock Commission (“the Commission”) under section 9 of the Agriculture Act 1967 (c. 22) (“the Act”) has as its objective the provision of such facilities or services, and the giving of such financial assistance, as the Commission shall determine for the purpose of the better organisation and development of the pig industry in dealing with the risk of pig herds contracting an infectious disease and the financial consequences for the businesses of pig producers, in so far as incurred in Great Britain, of any such disease. For this purpose, the Commission are given the functions set out in Schedule 1 to the Development Scheme. Paragraph 13 of the Development Scheme provides for the Commission to establish a fund for the operation of the Development Scheme, and Schedule 2 to the Development Scheme provides for contributions to that fund to be made from charges levied on slaughterers of pigs which are slaughtered in a slaughter house. The maximum charge per pig is specified as £1. Provision is made for the Commission to determine that such charges shall be recoverable from the person from whom the slaughterer has purchased the pig or on whose instructions the pig has been slaughtered, and, where such charges are recoverable from an auctioneer, for the charges to be recoverable by the auctoneer in turn from the person for whom he auctioned the pig. The Development Scheme enables the Commission to require slaughterers to be registered in a register kept by the Commission, and to keep accurate records relating to pigs slaughtered. The Development Scheme applies the offences in section 14(2) and (3) in relation to the levy scheme set out in Schedule 2, and also applies for the purposes of that levy scheme the powers of entry conferred by section 23 of the Act and the restrictions on disclosure of information in section 24 of the Act. A Regulatory Impact Assessment has been prepared in respect of this Order and has been deposited in the library of both Houses of Parliament.

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 “commits 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