Possession, placing on the market and use of feedingstuffs

paragraph 21(2) of SCHEDULE 5 of The Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2006

Revoked
Strict liability
Drugs and medicines

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

2 It is an offence to feed to any animal, or buy or possess for the purpose of feeding to any animal, any feedingstuff containing
a veterinary medicinal product or specified feed additive unless that veterinary medicinal product or specified feed additive is authorised for that species of animal and for the purpose for which it is used (unless prescribed under the cascade).

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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: breaching the provision
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 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 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

an offence under these Regulations relating to advertising, it is a defence for the person charged to prove— a that he is a person whose business it is to publish or arrange for the publication of advertisements, and b that he received the advertisement in the ordinary course of business and did not know and had no reason to suspect that its publication would amoun

What would breach paragraph 21(2) of SCHEDULE 5?

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.

Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2006.

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.

Drug offences: definitive guideline Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales
Covers importation, supply, production and possession of controlled drugs, with sentencing driven by drug class and the offender's role.
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 Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2007
Revoked on: 1 October 2007
Made: 5 September 2006
In force from: 1 October 2006
Extent: Not stated

How this was established: the instrument was revoked by a later instrument found in this corpus.

What the instrument is for

These Regulations revoke and remake with amendments the Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2005. They also amend the Medicines Act 1968, the Medicines Act 1971 and associated legislation so that they no longer apply to veterinary medicinal products. The principal changes to the 2005 Regulations are as follows. The Regulations re-introduce requirements for recording specific batches of veterinary medicinal products administered to food-producing animals (regulations 18 and 19). They introduce provisions for the approval of a manufacturer of a veterinary medicine for administration under the cascade (Part 4 of Schedule 2). They clarify the existing regulations in respect of retail supply by veterinary surgeons, pharmacists and suitably qualified persons (Part 1 of Schedule 3). They re-introduce requirements in respect of labelling veterinary medicinal products at the time of retail supply to avoid essential safety warnings and other information being obscured (Schedule 3 paragraph 11). They extend the requirement to hold a Certificate of Competence from those purchasing a product to those who are engaged in dipping sheep (Part 3 of Schedule 3). They introduce a provision that the incorporation of veterinary medicinal products into feed for animals for domestic consumption or non-food animals no longer requires approval (Schedule 5 paragraph 6). They change the way that fees are charged for a marketing authorisation to reflect more accurately the work involved in any individual application (Schedule 7). The Regulations make provision for the authorisation, manufacture, classification, distribution and administration of veterinary medicinal products. They implement Directive 2001/82/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Community Code relating to veterinary medicinal products (OJ No. L311, 28.11.2001, p. 1), as amended by Directive 2004/28/EC (OJ No. L136, 30.4.2004, p. 58). They also identify the competent authority for, and provide for enforcement of, Regulations (EC) No. 178/2002 (OJ No. L31, 1.2.2002, p. 1), (EC) No. 1831/2003 (OJ No. L268, 18.10.2003, p. 29), (EC) No. 882/2004 (corrected version at OJ No. L191, 28.5.2004, p. 1) and (EC) No. 183/2005 (OJ No. L35, 8.2.2005, p. 1), in so far as they apply to veterinary medicinal products used in feedingstuffs, and to the following additives used in feedingstuffs: a coccidiostats; b histomonostats; c all other zootechnical additives except— i digestibility enhancers; ii gut flora stabilisers; and iii substances incorporated with the intention of favourably affecting the environment. In addition they implement Council Directive 90/167 laying down the conditions governing the preparation, placing on the market and use of medicated feedingstuffs in the Community (OJ No. L92, 7.4.90, p. 42) so far as they are not rendered spent by Regulation (EC) No. 183/2005. They provide that a veterinary medicinal product must have a marketing authorisation granted by the Secretary of State before being placed on the market, and make provision for the grant of a marketing authorisation (regulation 4 and Schedule 1). They specify that a veterinary medicinal product must be manufactured by a person holding a manufacturing authorisation, and make provision for granting an authorisation (regulation 5 and Schedule 2). They regulate supply and possession of veterinary medicinal products, and introduce new classifications of those products (regulation 7 and Schedule 3). They provide that a veterinary medicinal product may only be administered as specified in its marketing authorisation or, in the case of administration by a veterinary surgeon, administration under the “cascade” (regulation 8 and Schedule 4). They control bringing a veterinary medicinal product into the United Kingdom (regulation 9) and advertising (regulation 10 to 12). They control wholesale dealing (regulation 13). They control medicated feedingstuffs and feedingstuffs containing additives specified in the Regulations (regulation 14 and Schedule 5). They provide for exemptions (regulation 15 and Schedule 6). They provide for fees (regulation 16 and Schedule 7). They require records to be kept (regulations 17 to 24). They create offences of importation, possession and supply of unauthorised veterinary medicinal products (regulations 25 to 27). They make provision for the existence of the Veterinary Products Committee (regulation 28). They make provision for a representations procedure in the case of a refusal, etc., of a marketing authorisation (regulation 29). They create administrative arrangements for the enforcement of the Regulations (regulations 32 to 41). Under regulation 42 breach of the Regulations is an offence punishable— a on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or both, or b on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both. A Regulatory Impact Assessment has been prepared and placed in the libraries of both Houses of Parliament. It is available, together with a transposition note and a table showing fee changes, on www.vmd.gov.uk at “Publications, Veterinary Medicines Regulations and Guidance, new legislative developments”.

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.

Organophosphate Sheep Dip Commons · 10 June 2015 · George Eustice
The 1991 report—it is important to recognise that that report was published at the time—was a survey of farmers who self-reported symptoms. We should bear two things in mind. First, it was not a scientific report; all the reports that the Committee on Toxicity has looked at are scientifically robust research projects. The other thing to note is that the focus of the 1991 report was whether farmers had the correct…

Other offences in the same instrument

Labelling a premixture containing a veterinary medicinal productparagraph 10(3) of SCHEDULE 5
Labelling at the time of retail supplyparagraph 11(1) of SCHEDULE 3
Labelling of feedingstuffs containing a specified feed additiveparagraph 11(2) of SCHEDULE 5
Labelling at the time of retail supplyparagraph 11(3) of SCHEDULE 3
Labelling of feedingstuffs containing a veterinary medicinal productparagraph 12(2) of SCHEDULE 5
Supply by a suitably qualified personparagraph 13(6) of SCHEDULE 3
Authorisation to manufacture autogenous vaccinesparagraph 15(5) of SCHEDULE 2
Possessionparagraph 16(1) of SCHEDULE 5
Possessionparagraph 16(2) of SCHEDULE 5
Enforcement of Regulation (EC) No. 178/2002paragraph 2(2) of SCHEDULE 5
Possession, placing on the market and use of feedingstuffsparagraph 21(1) of SCHEDULE 5
Authorisation of blood banksparagraph 21(6) of SCHEDULE 2

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 0.90.

Basis: the provision says “it is an offence”; the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence: 0.90 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 Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2006 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
Drugs and medicinesOther offences on the same subject
Offences created in 2006