UK Offence Report

Notification of positive results

regulation 4(2) of The Specified Products from China (Restriction on First Placing on the Market) (England) Regulations 2008

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 without reasonable excuse fails to comply with the obligation in paragraph (1) is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

5 on the standard scale, to imprisonment for

a term not exceeding three months or to both.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
failing to do something the instrument requires
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

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.

“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: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised); other provisions of the same instrument use a mens rea word while this one does not (the Cundy v Le Cocq contrast).

The defence, as drafted

2 Any person who without reasonable excuse fails to comply with the obligation in paragraph (1) is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both.

What would breach regulation 4(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. On these words an offence is committed where a person without reasonable excuse fails to comply with the obligation in paragraph (1).
  2. Not doing what the provision requires under the Specified Products from China (Restriction on First Placing on the Market) (England) Regulations 2008, by the time it requires it to be done.
  3. Doing it, but not in the manner or to the standard the instrument specifies.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
3 months

this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (2008-04-15); 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
14 April 2008
In force from
15 April 2008
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 relation to England Commission Decision 2008/289/EC on emergency measures regarding the unauthorised genetically modified organism “Bt63” in rice products (OJ No. L96, 9.4.2008, p.29). These Regulations – a prohibit the first placing on the market of any “specified product” (defined in regulation 2(1)), except where – i it is accompanied by— aa an original analytical report based on a particular construct–specific method for detection of the genetically modified rice “Bt63” issued by an official or accredited laboratory demonstrating that the product does not contain or consist of or is not produced from the genetically modified rice “Bt63”, or bb if it does not contain or consist of rice or is not produced from rice, a statement from the operator responsible for the consignment indicating that the food does not contain or consist of rice or is not produced from rice; or ii the operator established in the Community who is responsible for the first placing on the market of the product has had the product tested and the analytical report in respect of that test demonstrates that it does not contain the genetically modified rice “Bt 63” (regulation 3(1)(a)); and iii specified requirements for split consignments are complied with (regulation 3(1)(b)); b provide that a person who knowingly contravenes that prohibition is guilty of an offence and prescribe penalties for that offence (regulation 3(2)); c require an operator who becomes aware of a positive result of a test for the presence of the genetically modified rice “Bt 63” in a specified product that is under his control to inform the Food Standards Agency of that result immediately regulation 4(1)); d provide that a person who without reasonable excuse fails to comply with that requirement is guilty of an offence and prescribe penalties for that offence (regulation 4(2)); e provide for their enforcement (regulation 5); and f apply with modifications certain provisions of the Food Safety Act 1990 (1990 c.16) for the purposes of the Regulations (regulation 6). A full impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector is available from the Novel Foods, Additives and Supplements Division of the Food Standards Agency, 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

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