UK Offence Report

Obstruction

regulation 9 of The Pesticides (Maximum Residue Levels) (England and Wales) 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

9 It is an offence—

a intentionally to obstruct any person acting in the execution of these Regulations;

b knowingly to give any information that is false or misleading to any person acting in the execution of these Regulations;

c intentionally to fail to disclose any material particular to any person acting in the execution of these Regulations; or

d to fail, without reasonable excuse—

i to give any assistance that any person acting in the execution of these Regulations may require, or

ii to produce any record that any person acting in the execution of these Regulations may require to be produced, for the performance of that person’s functions under 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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, knowingly).

“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, intentionally; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

acting in the execution of these Regulations; or d to fail, without reasonable excuse— i to give any assistance that any person acting in the execution of these Regulations may require, or ii to produce any record that any person acting in the execution of these Regulations may require to be produced, for the performance of that person’s funct

What would breach regulation 9?

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 Pesticides (Maximum Residue Levels) (England and Wales) Regulations 2008.
  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
£5,000
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

expressed as the statutory maximum (the prescribed sum): the same words mean £5,000 in England and Wales and £10,000 in Scotland.

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
2 October 2008
In force from
1 November 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 enforce the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council on maximum residue levels of pesticides in or on food and feed of plant and animal origin and amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC (“Regulation 396/2005”). Regulation 4 designates the Health and Safety Executive as the national authority for the purposes of Article 38 of Regulation 396/2005. Regulation 5 provides that the functions of the member State in Regulation 396/2005, other than those specified in Article 34 (sanctions) and Article 38 (designation of national authorities), are to be performed by the Health and Safety Executive. Regulation 6 creates an offence of placing on the market as food or feed, or feeding to an animal, any product covered by Annex I to Regulation 396/2005, if that product contains pesticide residue levels in excess of those specified in Article 18(1) of that Regulation as read with Article 20(1). Regulation 7 creates an offence of processing or mixing certain products with a view to placing them on the market as food or feed, or feeding them to animals. Regulation 8 and Schedule 1 set out powers of inspectors. Regulation 11 provides that any person guilty of an offence under these Regulations is liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or, on conviction on indictment, to a fine. A Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) was prepared for the Pesticides (Maximum Residue Levels in Crops, Food and Feeding Stuffs) (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 (S.I. 2005/3286), which this instrument revokes and replaces. That RIA provides a basis for establishing the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector and is available from the Pesticides Safety Directorate, Room 308, Mallard House, Kings Pool, 3 Peasholme Green, York, YO1 7PX. Copies have been placed in the library of each House of Parliament.

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 0.90.

Basis
the provision says “it is an offence”; the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.90 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