Interpretation
regulation 2(1) of The Electronic Commerce Directive (Financial Services and Markets) Regulations 2002
- Status not determined
- Strict liability
- Corporate, financial services, company law, employment, charity, electoral and tax
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
“criminal conduct” means conduct which constitutes an offence in any part of the United Kingdom, or would constitute an offence in any part of the United Kingdom if it occurred there;
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
- dealing with funds or making them available in breach of sanctions
- 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 2(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.
- Moving, converting or paying away funds that belong to a designated person under the Electronic Commerce Directive (Financial Services and Markets) Regulations 2002, without a licence from the Treasury.
- Making funds or economic resources available to a designated person - which includes paying a third party who will pass on the benefit.
- Dealing with an asset in ignorance of the designation is still caught where the provision imposes no knowledge requirement; check the fault element stated below before assuming otherwise.
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.
-
Sentencing organisations: fines and the means of a corporate defendant
All courts in England and Wales
How a fine on a company is arrived at from its turnover. Relevant far beyond the guidelines that state it, because a very large share of the offences in this corpus can only be committed by an organisation.
-
Fraud, bribery and money laundering offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2014
Covers fraud, false accounting, bribery and money laundering, including offences committed by organisations.
-
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
- 12 July 2002
- In force from
- Not determined
- 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 Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
These Regulations give effect to the European Parliament and Council Directive of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce) (No. 2000/31/EC) (“the Directive”), in respect of matters within the scope of regulation by the Financial Services Authority under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (c. 8) (“the 2000 Act”). These Regulations should be read with the Financial Services and Markets Act (Regulated Activities) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order 2002 (S.I. 2002/1776) (“the RAO Amendment Order”) and the Financial Services and Markets Act (Financial Promotion) (Amendment) (Electronic Commerce Directive) Order 2002 (S.I. 2002/2157), which make amendments to secondary legislation under the 2000 Act in consequence of the Directive. The Regulations should also be read with forthcoming regulations to be made by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, which will give effect to the Directive in other areas. Article 3 of the Directive provides, inter alia, for the regulation of information society services (defined in Article 2(a)) (“ISS”) on a “country of origin” basis. Member States are required to ensure that providers of ISS established on their territories comply with national legal requirements falling within the “coordinated field”, as defined in Article 2(h) of the Directive. They are also prohibited from restricting, for reasons falling within the co-ordinated field, the freedom to provide information society services from other Member States. Article 3.3 of the Directive excludes certain matters (listed in the Annex to the Directive) from the “country of origin” approach, including the advertising of their units by collective investment undertakings falling within Council Directive 85/611/EEC (“the UCITS Directive”), contractual obligations concerning consumer contracts, and the permissibility of unsolicited commercial communications by electronic mail. Article 3.4 of the Directive creates a derogation from the country of origin approach in relation to individual information society services, to be exercised on a case-by-case basis on public policy grounds, and subject to certain procedures. The RAO Amendment Order excludes from the scope of “regulated activities” under section 22 of the 2000 Act activities constituting the provision of an information society service from an establishment in a state in the European Economic Area other than the United Kingdom (termed “incoming electronic commerce activities” in these Regulations). Consequently, it is not necessary for persons to be “authorised persons” within the meaning of the 2000 Act before they can carry on such activities in the United Kingdom. Such persons will, however, need to be authorised in respect of regulated activities carried on in the United Kingdom that do not constitute the provision of an ISS. Part 2 of these Regulations gives effect to certain of the exclusions in Article 3.3 of the Directive, by modifying the functions of the Financial Services Authority (“the Authority”) in relation to both authorised and unauthorised persons carrying on incoming electronic commerce activities (“incoming providers”). Regulation 3 modifies the Authority’s powers under section 138 (rules for the purpose of protecting the interests of consumers) of the 2000 Act, so that rules made under them may apply to incoming providers who are not authorised under the Act (“unauthorised incoming providers”). The area of application of rules made under those sections (in respect of all incoming providers, whether authorised or not) is then restricted to certain matters listed in the Annex to the Directive—the imposition of the information requirements specified in regulation 4 (“consumer contract requirements”), communications that constitute an advertisement of its units by a collective investment undertaking authorised in accordance with the UCITS Directive, and the permissibility of unsolicited commercial communications by electronic mail. Regulation 5 restricts the application of certain rules made by the Authority in connection with incoming providers. Part 3 of the Regulations gives effect to the “case-by-case” derogation in Article 3.4 of the Directive. Regulation 6 permits the Authority, in cases where the policy and procedural conditions in Article 3.4 (set out in regulations 7 and 8) are met, to direct that particular incoming providers may no longer carry on a particular electronic commerce activity, or may only do so subject to specified requirements. Regulation 9 provides that the Authority may dispense with the need to satisfy the conditions in regulations 7 and 8 in urgent cases, and regulations 10 and 11 make procedural provisions in connection with directions, including the rights of parties to whom they apply to refer the matter to the Financial Services and Markets Tribunal. Part 4 of the Regulations applies, with modifications, certain enforcement powers in the 2000 Act in respect of requirements imposed by the Authority under these Regulations. Part 5 of the Regulations gives effect to Article 3.1 of the Directive in relation to matters falling within the 2000 Act, by amending section 418 of that Act so that the activity of providing ISS within the European Economic Area from an establishment in the United Kingdom is to be regarded as carried on in the United Kingdom, in all cases where it would not otherwise be so regarded. Part 6 of the Regulations makes miscellaneous and consequential provisions with respect to the disclosure of information, the service of notices, the functions of the Authority and certain rights of action.
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.
-
Draft Electronic Commerce and Solvency 2 (amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019
Commons · 20 March 2019 · The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (John Glen)
I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Electronic Commerce and Solvency 2 (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship this afternoon, Mr Bailey. As the Committee will be aware, the Treasury has been undertaking a programme of legislation to ensure that if the UK leaves the EU without a deal or an implementation period, there will continue to be a functioning…
-
Financial Services (Miscellaneous) (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019
Lords · 21 March 2019 · The Minister of State, Department for International Development (Lord Bates) (Con)
My Lords, as this instrument is grouped, with the leave of the House, I shall speak also to the draft Electronic Commerce and Solvency 2 (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. These two instruments are part of the same legislative programme that we have discussed previously in the House to ensure that, if the UK were to leave the EU without a deal or an implementation period, there continued to be a…
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 0.75.
- Basis
- the provision says the conduct “constitutes an offence”
- Confidence
- 0.75 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 Electronic Commerce Directive (Financial Services and Markets) Regulations 2002 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Corporate, financial services, company law, employment, charity, electoral and taxOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 2002