UK Offence Report

Penalties

regulation 5(3) of Burma (Financial Sanctions) Regulations 2005 (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

3 Where— a any body corporate is guilty of an offence under these Regulation; and b that offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other similar office of the body corporate, or any person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, that person as well as the body corporate is guilty of that offence and is liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 body corporate
Conduct
breaching the provision
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 body corporate 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; other provisions of the same instrument use a mens rea word while this one does not (the Cundy v Le Cocq contrast).

What would breach regulation 5(3)?

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 body corporate was purporting to act in any such capacity, that person as well as the body corporate.
  2. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Burma (Financial Sanctions) Regulations 2005.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
3 months
Maximum prison (on indictment)
3 months

this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (2005-06-29); 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
7 June 2005
In force from
29 June 2005
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 provide that breaches of certain provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 798/2004 of 26th April 2004 (the “EC Regulation”) relating to financial sanctions are criminal offences. The enforcement of other provisions of the EC Regulation are dealt with in the Burma (Sale, Supply, Export, Technical Assistance, Financing and Financial Assistance and Shipments of Equipment) (Penalties and Licences) Regulations 2004 (S.I. 2004/1315). The EC Regulation has had various amendments, most recently by Commission Regulation (EC) No. 667/2005 of 28th April 2005. Schedule 1 to these Regulations lists the amending instruments. Regulation 2 provides that breaches of the following provisions of the EC Regulation are criminal offences:– Article 6(1) which provides for the freezing of funds and economic resources belonging to individual members of the Burmese Government and person or entities associated with them as listed in Annex III to the EC Regulation as amended; Article 6(2) which prohibits the making available of funds or economic resources directly or indirectly to or for the benefit of persons listed in Annex III to the EC Regulation as amended; Article 6(3) which prohibits the knowing and intentional participation in activities the object or effect of which is, directly or indirectly, to circumvent the prohibitions in Article 6(1) and (2); Article 8a(1) which prohibits the granting of any financial loan or credit to Burmese state-owned enterprises as listed in Annex IV to the EC Regulation as amended; the acquisition of bonds, certificates of deposit, warrants or debentures issued by such enterprises; and the acquisition or extension of a participation in such enterprises; Article 8a(2) which prohibits the knowing and intentional participation in activities the object or effect of which is, directly or indirectly, to circumvent the provisions in Article 8a(1); and Article 9, which requires all persons to immediately provide to the Treasury or the Bank of England and to the European Commission any information, which would facilitate compliance with the EC Regulation, but requires such information to be used only for the purposes for which it was provided or received. Regulation 3 makes it an offence to provide false information in connection with a request for authorisation under Article 7(1) of the EC Regulation. Regulation 4 and Schedule 2 make provision for information to be requested by or on behalf of the Treasury or the Bank of England for the purpose of ensuring compliance with the EC Regulation. Failure to provide such information, the provision of false information or the suppression of evidence is a criminal offence. Unauthorised disclosure of information acquired under Schedule 2 is also a criminal offence. Regulations 5 and 6 proscribe the penalties and procedures for breaches of regulations 2, 3, 4 and Schedule 2 to the Regulations. Regulation 7 revokes the Regulations that previously enforced the financial sanctions in the EC Regulation. A regulatory impact assessment has not been prepared for these Regulations, as they have no [minimal] impact on the cost of business.

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