UK Offence Report

Amendment of the 1997 Regulations

regulation 3 of The Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) (Amendment) 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

7 A person who furnishes, for the purposes of paragraph (6) above,

a statement which he knows to be false in

a material particular, or recklessly furnishes for those purposes

a certificate which is false in

a material particular, shall be guilty of an offence.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
Legal burden on the defendant

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (recklessly).

The provision gives a defence the defendant must prove, on the balance of probabilities. A legal burden of that kind can be read down to a merely evidential one under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 where placing it on the defendant would be disproportionate (R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37; Sheldrake v DPP [2004] UKHL 43).

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: recklessly.

The defence, as drafted

hall not be guilty of an offence under paragraph (1) or (2) if he proves that at the time the alleged offence was committed he had no reason to believe that the specimen was a specimen of a species listed in Annex A, or as the case may be Annex B. 5 A person shall not be guilty of an offence under paragraph (2) if he proves – a th

What would breach regulation 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. Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) (Amendment) Regulations 2005.
  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
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 (2005-07-21); 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
24 June 2005
In force from
21 July 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 amend the Control of Trade in Endangered Species (Enforcement) Regulation 1997 (S.I. 1997/1372). As was the case with the 1997 Regulations before amendment, these Regulations create a number of criminal offences in relation to Article 8 of Council Regulation No. 338/97 (“the Principal Regulation”), in particular, they create offences related to the purchase and sale of specimens listed in Annex A of the Principal Regulation or of specimens listed in Annex B which have been imported or acquired unlawfully. As provided by section 307 of the Criminal Justice Act, these Regulations increase the penalties that apply for offences related to commercial activity involving Annex A and B specimens.

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