UK Offence Report

Offences, penalties and enforcement

regulation 3(1) of The Feeding Stuffs (Safety Requirements for Feed for Food–Producing Animals) Regulations 2004

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

1 Any person who contravenes or fails to comply with any of the specified provisions of Regulation 178/2002 set out in paragraph (2) shall be guilty of an offence and liable —

a in the case of paragraph (2)(a) —

i on summary conviction to

a term of imprisonment not exceeding three months or to

a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or both; or

ii on conviction on indictment to

a term of imprisonment not exceeding two years or to

a fine, or both;

b in the case of paragraph (2)(b), (c) and (d) on summary conviction to

a term of imprisonment not exceeding three months or to

a fine not exceeding level

5 on the standard scale, or both.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 regulation 3(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.

  1. On these words an offence is committed where a person contravenes or fails to comply with any of the specified provisions of Regulation 178/2002 set out in paragraph (2).
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Feeding Stuffs (Safety Requirements for Feed for Food–Producing Animals) Regulations 2004, whatever the reason for doing it.
  3. Where the requirement is a positive duty, letting the time for performing it pass without performing it.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (2005-01-01); the standard scale is keyed to the date the offence was committed, and for conduct today the same words mean an unlimited fine.

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
9 December 2004
In force from
1 January 2005
Extent
E+W+S

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 are occasioned by Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002 of the Council and European Parliament (OJ No. L31, 1.2.2002, p.1) laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (“Regulation 178/2002”). The term “food law” includes law relating to feed for food-producing animals. The Regulations make it an offence, with regard to animal feed other than certain zootechnical additives, to contravene or fail to comply with the provisions of Articles 15, 16, 18 and 20 of Regulation 178/2002. (Regulation 178/2002 is also applicable to those zootechnical additives, but in respect of those substances will be given effect by Regulations relating to veterinary medicines). Article 15 contains a prohibition on the placing on the market, or the feeding to food–producing animals, of unsafe feed. Article 16 prohibits the advertising, labelling or presentation of feed in such a way as to mislead. Article 18 requires feed business operators to have traceability systems in place in relation to input products and to products supplied by that business. Article 20 lays down the responsibilities and obligations of feed business operators in connection with product withdrawal, passing on of relevant information and collaboration with the authorities, with regard to feed that does not, or may not, satisfy feed safety requirements. The Regulations make amendments to the provisions of sections 73 and 73A of the Agriculture Act 1970 by disapplying them in so far as they may duplicate the provisions of Article 15 of Regulation 178/2002. Pursuant to Article 4(2) and (3) of Regulation 178/2002, the Regulations also disapply the provisions of section 84(1) of the Agriculture Act 1970 and section 30(6)(a) of the Food Standards Act 1999 in so far as they may duplicate the provisions of Article 9 of Regulation 178/2002. Article 9 contains a requirement for public consultation during the preparation, evaluation and revision of food law, except where the urgency of the matter does not allow it. A regulatory impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business has not been prepared because no significant compliance costs were identified.

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