UK Offence Report

2 A person shall be guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of procuring the authority to issue a plant…

article 15(2) of The Plant Health (Phytophthora ramorum) (England) Order 2004 (revoked)

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

2 A person shall be guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of procuring the authority to issue a plant passport under this Order, he— a makes a statement which he knows to be false in a material particular; b recklessly makes a statement which is false in a material particular; or c intentionally fails to disclose any material information.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 (intentionally, recklessly).

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: intentionally, recklessly.

What would breach article 15(2)?

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 Plant Health (Phytophthora ramorum) (England) Order 2004.
  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
Not determined
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

the level is stated but no money value is given: this instrument extends outside the United Kingdom, where the standard scale set by s.122(1) of the Sentencing Act 2020 does not run.

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.

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
2 October 2004
In force from
29 October 2004
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, which comes into force on 29th October 2004, implements in England— Commission Decisions 2002/757/EC of 19th September 2002 (OJ No. L 252, 20.9.2002, p. 37) and 2004/426/EC of 29th April 2004 (OJ No. L 189, 27.5.2004, p. 1) on provisional emergency phytosanitary measures to prevent the introduction into and the spread within the Community of Phytophthora ramorum insofar as they relate to plants other than forest trees; and Commission Decision 2004/278/EC (OJ No. L 87, 25.3.2004, p. 31) on the Community position on the amendment of the Appendices to Annex 4 to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade and agricultural products insofar as it relates to Camellia, Rhododendron and Viburnum. The Order prohibits the introduction and spread of the plant pest Phytophthora ramorum (article 3). It controls the importation of material of a number of susceptible plant species and genera from the USA, requiring such material to be accompanied by phytosanitary certificates which may be issued only after specific checks have been carried out during production and before consignment; or alternatively, where the material originates in a part of the USA recognised by plant health authorities as free from Phytophthora ramorum, confirming that fact (article 4 and Schedule 1). Susceptible material imported from third countries, including the USA, must have a plant passport when it is moved within England or elsewhere in the European Community (“the EC”) or Switzerland (article 5). Plants of Camellia, Rhododendron and Viburnum produced in England or originating anywhere else in the EC or Switzerland, must be accompanied by a plant passport when they are moved, and are subject to further controls on their movement (article 6 and Schedule 2). The Order requires producers of Camellia, Rhododendron and Viburnum in England wishing to move such material to be registered if they are not already registered under the principal Plant Health Order (the Plant Health (Great Britain) Order 1993, as amended) (“the principal Order”) (article 7). There are some exceptions to the movement restrictions in the case of persons not acting in the course of a trade, business or undertaking (article 7(4)). Provisions similar to those in the principal Order apply to authorisations to registered traders to enable them to issue plant passports under the supervision of Defra, as the official plant health service in England (article 8) and to the issue of phytosanitary certificates in England and the treatment of phytosanitary certificates or plant passports issued outside England (articles 9 and 10). There is provision for licensed importation, movement and keeping of the prohibited pest for research purposes (article 11). Provisions similar to those in the principal Order apply to actions which may be required or which may be taken by Plant Health Inspectors (articles 12 to 14). Offences similar to those created in the principal Order are created in respect of the production of plant passports pursuant to this Order and in respect of the introduction, spread and movement of Phytophthora ramorum, compliance with notices served under this Order and the obstruction of inspectors exercising their powers under this Order (article 15). The Plant Health (Phytophthora ramorum) (England) (No. 2) Order 2002 (SI 2002/2573) is revoked (article 16). A regulatory impact assessment of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade and agricultural products and of the measures concerning Commission Decision 2004/426/EC implemented in this Order has been carried out and is available from Plant Health Division, DEFRA, Foss House, Kings Pool, Peasholme Green, York YO1 7PX.

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 0.92.

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