Contravention of The Cosmetic Products (Safety) Regulations 2003
the instrument as a whole of The Cosmetic Products (Safety) Regulations 2003
- Revoked
- Strict liability
- Set by another provision
- Food, consumer protection, trading standards, product safety and age-restricted sales
The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.
What the provision says
Contravening this instrument is an offence under section
12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987. The instrument itself contains no offence-creating words.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
- breaching the provision
- Fault element
- Strict liability
- Burden of proof
- Not determined
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.
Classifier’s reasoning: contravention offences of this kind are strict as to the breach; the fault position is governed by the parent Act and was not read from it.
What would breach the instrument as a whole?
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 Cosmetic Products (Safety) Regulations 2003.
Penalty
- Mode of trial
- Set by another provision — the instrument states the penalty by reference to an Act or to another regulation
- Maximum fine
- Not determined
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
The instrument does not state a penalty itself. It sets one by reference to section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1987.
the penalty is in the parent Act, not in this instrument.
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.
-
Health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter and food safety and hygiene offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 February 2016
Covers breaches of duty under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the regulations made under it, and food safety and food hygiene offences. Sentencing turns on culpability and on the seriousness and likelihood of harm risked, not only on the harm that happened.
-
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
- Revoked
- Revoked by
- The Cosmetic Products (Safety) Regulations 2004
- Revoked on
- 11 September 2004
- Made
- 20 March 2003
- In force from
- 15 April 2003
- 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 revoke and re-enact the Cosmetic Products (Safety) Regulations 1996 (S.I. 1996/2625 as amended by S.I. 1997/2914, S.I. 1998/1727, S.I. 1999/1552, S.I. 2000/1679 and S.I. 2000/2765; together “the 1996 Regulations”). The 1996 Regulations give effect to Council Directive 76/768/EEC (O.J. No. L262, 27.9.76, p. 169) on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products, as amended by the Community instruments listed in Schedule 2 to these Regulations. These Regulations also give effect for the first time to Commission Directive 2002/34/EC (O.J. No. L102, 18.4.02, p.19) as follows— a in Schedule 1 to the 1996 Regulations (now Schedule 3 to these Regulations) relating to substances which cosmetic products (as defined in regulation 3(1)) of these Regulations) must not contain— i by amending entry 631 (now entry 634) relating to radioactive substances; and ii by inserting, as a new Part II to that Schedule, 29 new substances which cosmetic products must not contain when used as a fragrance ingredient; b in Part I of Schedule 2 to the 1996 Regulations (now Schedule 4 to these Regulations) relating to substances which cosmetic products must not contain except subject to the restrictions laid down— i by amending entries 8, 15b, 15c and 16 regarding m- and p-phenylenediamines, lithium hydroxide, calcium hydroxide and [1-n]aphthol respectively; ii by inserting a new entry 66 regarding polyacrylamides; c in Part II of Schedule 2 to the 1996 Regulations (now Schedule 4 to these Regulations) relating to substances provisionally allowed, by inserting 62 new substances; and d in Part I of Schedule 5 to the 1996 Regulations (now Schedule 7 to these Regulations) relating to UV filters (as defined in regulation 3(1) of these Regulations) which cosmetic products may not contain except subject to the restrictions laid down, by inserting new entries 26 and 27 regarding dimethicodiethylbenzalmalonate and titanium dioxide respectively. In addition, the Regulations give effect for the first time to Commission Directive 2003/1/EC (O.J. No. L5, 10.1.03, p. 14) by substituting a new regulation 5(3) concerning specified risk material in relation to bovine, ovine and caprine animals. Regulation 5(3) prohibits the supply of a cosmetic product which contains any such specified risk material. Furthermore, the Regulations give effect for the first time to Commission Directive 2003/16/EC (O.J. No. L46, 20.2.03, p. 24) by extending from 28th February 2003 to 30th September 2004 the date in column 7 of Part II of Schedule 4 to the Regulations by which substance numbers 61 and 62 are permitted to be used. The Colour Index referred to in these Regulations may be obtained from the Society of Dyers and Colourists, PO Box No. 244, Perkin House, 88 Grattan Road, Bradford BDI 2JB. The ninth edition of the International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary Handbook referred to in these Regulations may be obtained from Micelle Press, 12 Ullswater Crescent, Weymouth, Dorset DT3 5HE. “A full regulatory impact assessment report of the effect that these Regulations would have on the costs to business, together with a Transposition Note, is freely available to the public from the Consumer and Competition Policy Directorate, Department of Trade and Industry, 4th Floor, 1 Victoria Street, London SW1H 0ET. Copies of the report have also been placed in the libraries of both Houses of Parliament.”
Read the full note and every offence in this 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 0.55.
- Basis
- the penalty comes from the enabling Act rather than from this instrument
- Confidence
- 0.55 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 Cosmetic Products (Safety) Regulations 2003 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Food, consumer protection, trading standards, product safety and age-restricted salesOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 2003