UK Offence Report

Offences and penalties

regulation 13(1) of The Rural Development (Enforcement) (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 for the purposes of obtaining

a rural development payment for himself or any other person, he knowingly or recklessly makes

a statement which is false or misleading in

a material particular;

b he intentionally obstructs an authorised person, or

a person accompanying him and acting under his instructions, in the exercise of his powers under regulation

3 or 5(2); or

c without reasonable cause, he fails to comply with

a request made under regulation 4.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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

What would breach regulation 13(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 Rural Development (Enforcement) (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
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£1,000
Standard scale
Level 3
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

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
9 January 2007
In force from
12 February 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 Article 74(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1698/2005 (O.J. No. L277, 21.10.2005, p.1) (“the Rural Development Regulation”) and Article 9(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1290/2005 (O.J. No. L209, 11.8.2005, p.1), which require Member States to adopt legislative and administrative provisions to ensure that the Community’s financial interests in relation to expenditure on rural development are effectively protected. They also implement Article 51(1) of the Rural Development Regulation, which applies the cross-compliance provisions in Articles 4 and 5 of, and Annexes III and IV to, Council Regulation (EC) No. 1782/2003 (O.J. No. L270, 21.10.2003, p.1) to certain rural development measures. Regulation 3 gives powers of entry and inspection to persons authorised by the Secretary of State, the Forestry Commission, Natural England or a Regional Development Agency, for purposes relating to rural development commitments. Regulation 4 requires certain persons to give assistance to authorised persons on request. Regulation 5 applies certain provisions of the Common Agricultural Policy Single Payment and Support Schemes (Cross-compliance) (England) Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/3459) in relation to rural development commitments to which Article 51(1) of the Rural Development Regulation applies. Regulation 6 gives a power to the Secretary of State to enter into arrangements with any of the bodies delivering rural development measures to pay rural development payments on their behalf. Regulation 7 makes provision for situations where land subject to a rural development commitment is transferred. Regulation 8 gives the Secretary of State, and the delivery bodies, the power to determine that a beneficiary has breached a rural development commitment or other relevant requirement, and that the beneficiary has done so recklessly or intentionally. Regulation 9 gives powers of recovery and other powers to the Secretary of State and the delivery bodies, which can be exercised where there has been a determination under regulation 8. Regulation 13 creates offences of making a false or misleading statement in order to obtain a rural development payment, obstructing an authorised person, and failing to give assistance to an authorised person. A full regulatory impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector is available at http://www.defra.gov.uk/erdp/rdp07_13/default.htm 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”
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