UK Offence Report

Obstruction

regulation 15(1) of The Eggs and Chicks (England) Regulations 2007 (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

1 A person is guilty of an offence if —

a he intentionally obstructs an authorised officer acting in the execution of these Regulations;

b without reasonable excuse, he fails to give an authorised officer acting in the execution of these Regulations any assistance or information which that person may reasonably require of him for the performance of his functions under these Regulations;

c he gives to an authorised officer acting in the execution of these Regulations any information which he knows, or ought reasonably to know, to be false or misleading; or

d he fails to produce

a record when required to do so by an authorised officer acting in the execution of these Regulations.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
obstructing an official exercising a power
Fault element
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

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

“Without reasonable excuse” here is an element of the offence rather than a defence, so its absence is for the prosecution to prove (R v Charles [2009] EWCA Crim 1570).

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: intentionally; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

sed officer acting in the execution of these Regulations; b without reasonable excuse, he fails to give an authorised officer acting in the execution of these Regulations any assistance or information which that person may reasonably require of him for the performance of his functions under these Regulations; c he gives to an authorised office

What would breach regulation 15(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.

  1. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Eggs and Chicks (England) Regulations 2007.
  2. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
  3. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

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
Status not determined
Made
26 July 2007
In force from
22 August 2007
Extent
E

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 revoke and remake, with modifications, the Eggs (Marketing Standards) Regulations 1995 (S.I. 1995/1544) insofar as they apply to England. The 1995 Regulations, as amended, made provision for the enforcement of certain provisions of Regulation (EEC) No. 2782/75 of the Council on the production and marketing of eggs for hatching and of farmyard poultry chicks (OJ No. L 282, 1.11.1975, p. 100) and Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 1868/77 laying down detailed rules of application for Regulation (EEC) No. 2782/75 (OJ No. L 209, 17.8.1977, p. 1). They also made provision for the enforcement of certain provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 1907/90 (OJ No. L 173, 6.7.1990, p. 5) on certain marketing standards for eggs and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2295/2003 introducing detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EEC) No. 1907/90 (OJ No. L 340, 24.12.2003, p. 16). Council Regulation (EEC) No. 1907/90 and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2295/2003 have been revoked and replaced by Council Regulation (EC) No. 1028/2006 (OJ No. L 186, 7.7.2006, p. 1) and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 557/2007 (OJ No. L 132, 24.5.2007, p.5). These Regulations make provision for the continued enforcement of certain provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2782/75 and the continued enforcement of certain provisions of Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 1868/77, as from time to time amended, and also for the enforcement of certain provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1028/2006, as from time to time amended, and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 557/2007, as from time to time amended. The Regulations include provisions — a making the failure to comply with the provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2782/75 and Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 1868/77 mentioned in Schedule 2 an offence (regulation 4); b relating to the registration of pedigree breeding establishments, other breeding establishments and hatcheries (regulation 5); c derogating from Article 2(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 1868/77 by allowing eggs for hatching to be marked in a different manner from that specified in that provision (regulation 6); d making the failure to comply with the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1028/2006 and Commission Regulation (EC) No. 557/2007 mentioned in Schedule 3 an offence (regulation 7); e relating to the authorisation of packing centres to grade eggs (regulation 8); f derogating from the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1028/2006, as regards the marking of eggs for consumption (regulation 9); g varying the minimum requirements for the marketing of eggs as free-range eggs by authorising livestock grazing on open-air runs for hens producing such eggs (regulation 10); h derogating from the provisions of Commission Regulation (EC) No. 557/2007, by allowing eggs to be marketed as free-range eggs although not all of the requirements laid down in that Regulation for free-range eggs are met (regulation 11); i derogating from the provisions of Commission Regulation (EC) No. 557/2007, by allowing eggs to be marketed as barn eggs although not all of the requirements laid down in that Regulation for barn eggs are met (regulation 12); j providing a right of appeal against certain decisions of the Secretary of State and authorised officers (regulation 18); and k creating a penalty for offences under the Regulations (regulation 19). A partial regulatory impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector is available at www.defra.gov.uk or from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR and is annexed to the Explanatory Memorandum which is available alongside this instrument on the OPSI website (www.opsi.gov.uk).

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