UK Offence Report

Information

regulation 5(2) of The Meat (Official Controls Charges) (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

2 Any person who —

a in purported compliance with paragraph (1), knowingly or recklessly furnishes information which is false or misleading in

a material particular; or

b without reasonable excuse, fails to comply within

a reasonable time with

a demand made under that paragraph, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level5 on the standard scale.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
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 (knowingly, knowingly or recklessly, recklessly).

“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: knowingly, recklessly, knowingly or recklessly; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

which is false or misleading in a material particular; or b without reasonable excuse, fails to comply within a reasonable time with a demand made under that paragraph, shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level5 on the standard scale.

What would breach regulation 5(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. Entering a figure on a form or return that is known to be wrong under the Meat (Official Controls Charges) (England) Regulations 2007.
  2. Leaving out something the form asks for, where the omission is what makes the answer misleading.
  3. Producing a document to an official that has been altered since it was issued.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

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
19 February 2007
In force from
26 March 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 apply in relation to England only. They revoke and replace the Meat (Official Controls Charges) (England) Regulations 2006 (S.I. 2006/2705). These Regulations provide for the execution and enforcement in relation to England of Articles 26 and 27 of Regulation (EC) No. 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules (OJ No. L165, 30.4.2004, p.1; the revised text of Regulation (EC) No. 882/2004 is now set out in a Corrigendum, OJ No. L191, 28.5.2004, p.1), in so far as those provisions require fees to be collected to cover the costs occasioned by official controls performed, first, on meat of domestic ungulates, meat from poultry and lagomorphs, meat of farmed game and meat of wild game under Regulation (EC) No. 854/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption (OJ L139, 30.4.2004, p.206; the revised text of Regulation (EC) No. 854/2004 is now set out in a Corrigendum, OJ No. L226, 25.6.2004, p.83) and, second, to verify compliance with the animal welfare rules set out in Council Directive 93/119/EC (OJ No. L340, 31.12.93, p.21) in so far as they apply in relation to animals slaughtered for human consumption at slaughterhouses. These Regulations — require the Agency to notify the operator of each slaughterhouse, game-handling establishment and cutting plant in which official controls have been exercised of the official controls charge that has arisen in relation to those officials controls (the terms “slaughterhouse”, “game-handling establishment”, “cutting plant”, “official controls” and “official controls charge” are all defined in regulation 2) (regulation 3); provide that any official controls charge so notified is payable by the operator to the Agency on demand (regulation 3); allow the Agency to refuse to exercise any further official controls at given premises where, despite a Court order requiring the operator of the premises to pay the official controls charge for which he is liable, he fails to comply with the order (regulation 4); require persons — to supply the Agency on demand with such information as it may reasonably require for the purpose of calculating the official controls charge or notifying the operator of it, and to supply the Agency on demand with such evidence as it may reasonably require to verify that information (regulation 5); provide that a person who — in response to a demand for information or evidence, knowingly or recklessly furnishes false or misleading information, or without reasonable excuse, fails to comply within a reasonable time with a demand for information or evidence, is guilty of an offence (regulation 5). Schedule 2 to these Regulations sets out how the official controls charge is to be calculated. A full regulatory impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector is available from the Meat Hygiene and Veterinary Division of the Food Standards Agency at Aviation House, 125 Kingsway, London, WC2B 6NH and is annexed to the Explanatory Memorandum which is available alongside the instrument on the OPSI website.

Read the full note and every offence in this 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”; the provision states liability on summary conviction; the provision states a penalty in older drafting
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