Making of false statements etc.
regulation 37(1) of The Railways Infrastructure (Access and Management) Regulations 2005
- Revoked
- Requires proof of a state of mind
- Either way
- Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harbours
The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.
What the provision says
1 If any person, in giving any information or making any application under or for the purposes of any provision of these Regulations, makes any statement which he knows to be false in a material particular, or recklessly makes any statement which is false in a material particular, he is guilty of an offence and shall be liable— a on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum; b on conviction on indictment, to a fine.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 (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: recklessly.
What would breach regulation 37(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.
- Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Railways Infrastructure (Access and Management) Regulations 2005.
- Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
- 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
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
expressed as the statutory maximum (the prescribed sum): the same words mean £5,000 in England and Wales and £10,000 in Scotland.
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.
-
Sentencing organisations: fines and the means of a corporate defendant
All courts in England and Wales
How a fine on a company is arrived at from its turnover. Relevant far beyond the guidelines that state it, because a very large share of the offences in this corpus can only be committed by an organisation.
-
Health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter and food safety and hygiene offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 February 2016
Covers breaches of duty under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the regulations made under it, and food safety and food hygiene offences. Sentencing turns on culpability and on the seriousness and likelihood of harm risked, not only on the harm that happened.
-
Imposition of community and custodial sentences: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales
When a community order or custody is justified at all, and the presumption against short custodial sentences.
-
Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 June 2017
The sliding scale of credit for pleading guilty, from one third at the first stage of proceedings downwards.
-
General guideline: overarching principles
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2019
The guideline a court uses when there is no offence-specific guideline, which is the position for the overwhelming majority of offences created by statutory instrument. It sets out how culpability and harm are assessed from first principles.
-
Totality: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales
How to sentence more than one offence at once so that the total is just and proportionate - frequently in point here, because regulatory prosecutions commonly charge several breaches of the same instrument.
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 Railways (Access, Management and Licensing of Railway Undertakings) Regulations 2016
- Revoked on
- 29 July 2016
- Made
- 1 November 2005
- In force from
- 28 November 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 Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
These Regulations implement Council Directive 91/440/EEC dated 29 July 1991 on the development of the Community’s railways, as amended by Directive 2001/12/EC dated 26 February 2001 and Directive 2004/51/EC dated 29 April 2004, both of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Council Directive 2001/14/EC dated 26 February 2001 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure, as amended by Directive 2004/49/EC dated 29 April 2004 on safety on the Community’s railways, both of the European Parliament and of the Council. With noted exceptions relating to amendments to primary legislation, these Regulations do not apply to Northern Ireland. Part 1 contains preliminary provisions. Part 2 grants access and transit rights to international groupings and freight operators to the entire rail network in Great Britain, including access to terminals and ports linked to the rail network. It also grants all applicants certain rights of access to, and the supply of, the services listed in Schedule 2 to the Regulations. Part 3 imposes certain separation requirements between the bodies responsible for management of the railway infrastructure (“infrastructure managers”) and railway undertakings. Infrastructure managers are placed under a requirement to produce a network statement containing the information set out in regulation 11. Part 4, together with Schedule 3, sets out the structure for the charging of fees for the use of railway infrastructure, and the charging principles. Part 5, together with Schedule 4, sets out the framework and timetable for the process of allocating infrastructure capacity. The trading of capacity is prohibited, and allocation in the form of fixed train paths cannot be granted for longer than one timetable period. Regulations 23 to 25 set out the procedure that must be followed where an element of the railway infrastructure is congested, and regulation 26 provides a “use it or lose it” provision in respect of allocated capacity. Part 6 allocates certain regulatory functions to the Office of Rail Regulation (“ORR”). Regulation 29 provides a right of appeal to the ORR for applicants aggrieved with various aspects of the allocation of capacity and the fees charged for the use of that capacity, and requires the ORR to make a decision on such appeals within two months. Regulation 30 requires the ORR to monitor competition in the rail services market and to take appropriate action to deal with undesirable developments in the market, either arising out of its own investigations, or from complaints which have been submitted. Regulation 32 provides for the abolition of the International Rail Regulator. Schedule 1 contains consequential amendments and repeals to the Railways Act 1993, the Channel Tunnel Rail Link Act 1996, and other miscellaneous provisions. A Regulatory Impact Assessment has been prepared and copies can be obtained from the Department for Transport, Great Minster House, 76 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DR. A copy has been placed in the Library of each House of Parliament. A copy of the Transposition Note is also available from the Department for Transport. Copies of the Regulatory Impact Assessment and of the Transposition Note may also be accessed on the HMSO website www.opsi.gov.uk.
Read the full note and every offence in this instrument
What Parliament said
Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.
-
Channel Tunnel Rail Link (Supplementary Provisions) Bill
Lords · 12 March 2008 · Lord Bassam of Brighton
We have been over this territory before, but it is perhaps worth setting it out some more. The Bill is a preliminary step towards the restructuring of LCR's constituent businesses. One of the purposes of that restructuring is to separate those three businesses—HS1 infrastructure, its interest in Eurostar and its property business—and sell them. The first sale anticipated is that of the HS1 infrastructure, which is…
-
Channel Tunnel Rail Link (Supplementary Provisions) Bill
Lords · 12 March 2008 · Lord Bassam of Brighton
As the noble Lord will know, access charges for HS1 must be set in accordance with the charging framework established by the Secretary of State through the development agreement—I have explained that several times today. The amendments would change that arrangement so that the charging framework would be set by the Office of Rail Regulation by way of a periodic review. We do not think that HS1 should be subject to…
-
Crossrail Bill
Lords · 26 June 2008 · Lord Bassam of Brighton
The thanks have all been given. I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, and my noble friends Lord Brooke and Lord Berkeley. The committee did a first-rate job and I, too, am sorry that the noble Viscount, Lord Colville, is not here to hear his praises sung. He did an extremely good job. When I found a bit of spare time to listen to the committee’s proceedings, he certainly demonstrated a firm grip on…
-
Crossrail Bill
Lords · 26 June 2008 · Lord Bradshaw
I too thank all noble Lords who participated in the proceedings of the Bill committee, particularly the two present. I fully endorse what the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, said about there needing to be a single infrastructure manager and I believe that it should be Network Rail. I would like to touch on the question of the application of the Railways and Other Guided Transport Systems (Safety) Regulations 2006…
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
- This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
- The Railways Infrastructure (Access and Management) Regulations 2005 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harboursOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 2005