UK Offence Report

Tipping off: regulated sector 333A 1 A person commits an offence if— a the person discloses any matter…

paragraph 4 of SCHEDULE 2 of The Terrorism Act 2000 and Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Amendment) Regulations 2007

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

4 After section 333 insert— Tipping off: regulated sector 333A

1 A person commits an offence if—

a the person discloses any matter within subsection (2);

b the disclosure is likely to prejudice any investigation that might be conducted following the disclosure referred to in that subsection; and

c the information on which the disclosure is based came to the person in the course of

a business in the regulated sector.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
Mixed — some elements strict, some not
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

The prosecution must prove the conduct, and - for those elements the provision qualifies (know or suspect that) - the state of mind it names. The remaining elements carry no fault requirement, so they are strict.

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: no fault word in the offence-creating words, but the surrounding provision uses know or suspect that - which element it governs was not determined.

What would breach paragraph 4 of SCHEDULE 2?

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. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Terrorism Act 2000 and Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Amendment) Regulations 2007.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
3 months
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (2007-12-26); 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
3 December 2007
In force from
26 December 2007
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 implement, in part, Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26th October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (“the Directive”). The regulations give effect to Chapter 3 of the Directive. Schedule 1 to the regulations makes amendments to the Terrorism Act 2000. Schedule 2 to the regulations makes amendments to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. Paragraph 2 of Schedule 1 inserts three new sections into the Terrorism Act 2000 to cover the requirements of Article 24 of the Directive. Section 21ZA provides a defence to the offences in sections 15 to 18 of the Terrorism Act 2000, if the person has made a disclosure to an authorised officer before becoming involved in a transaction or an arrangement and the person acts with the consent of the authorised officer. Section 21ZB provides a further defence to the offences in sections 15 to 18 to cover those who become involved in a transaction or an arrangement and then make a disclosure, so long as there is a reasonable excuse for failure to make a disclosure in advance. Finally, section 21ZC provides a defence for those who have a reasonable excuse for failure to make a disclosure. Article 28.1 of the Directive prohibits the persons covered by the Directive from disclosing to the customer concerned or to other third persons the fact that information about known or suspected money laundering or terrorist financing has been transmitted in accordance with Articles 22 and 23 or that a money laundering or terrorist financing investigation is being, or may be, carried out. The remainder of Article 28 provides a number of exceptions. Paragraph 5 of Schedule 1 to the regulations amends the Terrorism Act 2000 to give effect to Article 28. New section 21D contains a new offence of tipping off and new sections 21E to 21G set out the exceptions from Article 28. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Schedule 2 to the regulations give effect to Article 28 in the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. The existing offence of tipping off in section 333 of that Act is repealed by paragraph 3. Paragraph 4 inserts a new section 333A into the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to create a new offence of tipping off to cover the regulated sector. New sections 333B to 333D give effect to the exceptions in Article 28. The regulated sector is defined in Schedule 3A to the Terrorism Act 2000 (as amended by the Terrorism Act 2000 (Business in the Regulated Sector and Supervisory Authorities) Order 2007 (S.I. No. 2007/3288)) and Schedule 9 to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (as amended by the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Business in the Regulated Sector and Supervisory Authorities) Order 2007 (S.I. No 2007/3287)). Article 21 of the Directive requires Member States to establish a Financial Intelligence Unit (“FIU”). The Serious Organised Crime Agency is the United Kingdom’s FIU. This is further expanded on in Recital 29 of the Directive. Recital 29 makes it clear that reports of suspicious activity may be made to persons other than the FIU so long as the information is forwarded promptly and unfiltered to the FIU. Both the Terrorism Act 2000 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 allow disclosures to be made to a person other than the Serious Organised Crime Agency and so new section 21C of the Terrorism Act 2000 (inserted by paragraph 5 of Schedule 1) and section 339ZA of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (inserted by paragraph 7 of Schedule 2) give effect to the requirements of Article 21 together with recital 29. Paragraph 3(2) and paragraph 4 of Schedule 1 to the regulations amend sections 21A and 21B of the Terrorism Act 2000 respectively, in order to give full effect to the requirements of Article 22.1 of the Directive. Article 22.1 requires those covered by the Directive to make reports of knowledge and suspicions of money laundering and terrorist financing that have been attempted as well as committed. Paragraph 3(3) to (6) of Schedule 1 amends section 21A of the Terrorism Act 2000 to give effect to Article 23.2 of the Directive, which provides that Member States are not required to apply the reporting obligations to legal and other professionals when giving legal advice. The remaining amendments to the Terrorism Act 2000 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 are consequential amendments. The relevant changes appear in paragraph 6 of Schedule 1 and paragraphs 2, 5, 6 and 8 of Schedule 2.

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 “commits 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