UK Offence Report

Contravention of Regulation 648/2004

regulation 7(3) of The Detergents Regulations 2005

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

3 Any manufacturer who fails to comply with

a request of the type referred to in the second sub-paragraph of Article 9(3) of Regulation 648/2004 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 manufacturer
Conduct
failing to comply with a notice or direction
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

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 manufacturer 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 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: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision.

The defence, as drafted

h (2), be a defence for the person charged to prove that he took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of the offence by himself or by a person under his control. 2 If in any case the defence provided by paragraph (1) involves the allegation that the commission of the offence was due to an act or default of another person, or to relianc

What would breach regulation 7(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 manufacturer fails to comply with a request of the type referred to in the second sub-paragraph of Article 9(3) of Regulation 648/2004.
  2. Being served with a notice under the Detergents Regulations 2005 and doing nothing by the date it specifies.
  3. Doing part of what the notice requires, where it required all of it.
  4. Disagreeing with the notice and ignoring it, rather than using whatever appeal the instrument provides.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Not determined
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

no penalty is stated in this instrument; it may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence.

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
Revoked
Revoked by
The Detergents Regulations 2010
Revoked on
6 April 2010
Made
4 September 2005
In force from
8 October 2005
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 Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations provide for the enforcement in the United Kingdom of Regulation (EC) No 648/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on detergents (OJ No L 104, 8.4.2004, p.1), which is referred to in these Regulations and in this Note as “Regulation 648/2004” – see regulation 2(1). Regulation 648/2004 is directly applicable in the United Kingdom (and elsewhere in the European Union) but these Regulations provide for measures to be taken to enforce Regulation 648/2004 and for penalties for breach of Regulation 648/2004. Regulation 648/2004 applies to detergents and surfactants and regulation 2(1) defines the term “controlled product” to apply to both detergents and surfactants. Regulation 2(1) also provides for the terms “contravention” and “premises” to have extended definitions when used in the Regulations. Regulation 2(2) provides that terms (such as “detergent”, “surfactant”, “place on the market” and “manufacturer”) that are used in Regulation 648/2004 shall have the same meaning in these Regulations. Regulation 3 designates the Secretary of State as the UK competent authority for the purposes of Regulation 648/2004. At the time of publication, it is envisaged that this role will be carried out through the Pesticides Safety Directorate, an executive agency of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Regulation 4 establishes the enforcement authorities for the purposes of the Regulations. In England, Scotland and Wales, this power is conferred on local authorities and it is envisaged that it will be exercised by trading standards officers (except in the case of certain unitary authorities, where it may be exercised by environmental health officers instead). In Northern Ireland, the power is conferred on district councils and it is envisaged that it will be exercised by the councils' Environmental Health Services. Regulation 5 provides for the Secretary of State to appoint authorised officers to enforce these Regulations throughout the UK and also provides for the local authorities designated as enforcement authorities in regulation 4 to appoint authorised officers to enforce these Regulations within their areas. Regulation 6 provides that any information required under Regulation 648/2004 must be provided in English if the requirements of Regulation 648/2004 are to be treated as having been met. Regulation 7(1) makes it an offence to place a detergent or surfactant on the market in the UK unless all of the requirements in Regulation 648/2004 (such as composition, labelling, etc) are met – see Article 3(1) of Regulation 648/2004. Regulation 7(2) also makes it an offence not to comply with the information requirements imposed by Article 9 of Regulation 648/2004. Regulation 8, as read with regulation 3(2), provides for the Secretary of State to impose provisional restrictions or prohibitions on the sale and/or use of detergents (but not surfactants) in order to protect human health, animal health and the environment and makes it an offence to breach any such restriction or prohibition. Regulations 9 and 10 provide for authorised officers to serve notices, take action and impose requirements in order to deal with contraventions and make it an offence to fail to comply with a notice or requirement. These powers apply both in relation to contraventions of these Regulations and also of directly applicable provisions of Regulation 648/2004, which would be relevant where a product that does not meet the requirements of Regulation 648/2004 is placed on the market in another Member State but subsequently imported into the United Kingdom. Regulation 11 gives a power of entry to authorised officers and regulations 12, 13 and 14 provide for warrants to be issued in support of the power of entry. Regulation 15 makes supplemental provisions relating to the exercise of a power of entry. Regulation 16 gives authorised officers exercising a power of entry additional powers to inspect and sample detergents and surfactants (and substances suspected of being or containing detergents or surfactants), to inspect business records and to copy such records or seize and detain them for use as evidence and to take photographs for use as evidence. Regulation 17 grants limited immunity to authorised officers carrying out their enforcement functions but provides that the Secretary of State or the local authority who appointed the authorised officer may be liable instead or may indemnify an authorised officer. Regulation 18 makes it an offence to obstruct or fail to co-operate with an authorised officer or to provide false or misleading information. Regulation 19 makes it an offence for medical personnel and public employees who receive ingredient datasheets to breach confidentiality in the information contained in the datasheets or to use the information for non-medical purposes. Regulations 20, 21 and 22 provide for offences involving third parties, bodies corporate and Scottish partnerships. Regulation 23 provides for a defence of due diligence. Regulation 24 provides for the mode of trial and maximum penalties for offences against these Regulations— a An offence against either regulation 18(1) (obstruction etc) or regulation 19 (unlawful disclosure of information contained in datasheets) can only be tried without a jury and the maximum penalty that can be imposed following a conviction for such an offence after a summary trial is a fine at level 5 on the standard scale (currently, £5000). b Any other offence against these Regulations can be tried either with or without a jury and the maximum penalties are as follows— i following a conviction after a summary trial, the maximum penalty that can be imposed is a fine of up to the statutory maximum (currently, £5,000) and/or a prison sentence of up to three months; ii following a conviction after a jury trial, the maximum penalty that can be imposed is an unlimited fine and/or a prison sentence of up to two years. Regulations 25, 26 and 27 provide for a right of appeal against any enforcement measures taken by the Secretary of State or an authorised officer. Regulation 28 revokes the legislation that implemented the former Detergents Directives (which are themselves repealed by Regulation 648/2004).

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