UK Offence Report

Obstruction

regulation 13 of The Site Waste Management Plans Regulations 2008 (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

13 Any person who—

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

b without reasonable cause, fails to give to any person acting in the execution of these Regulations any assistance or information that that person may reasonably require under these Regulations;

c furnishes to any person acting in the execution of these Regulations any information knowing it to be false or misleading; or

d fails to produce

a site waste management plan or any other record when required to do so by any person acting in the execution of these Regulations, is guilty of an offence.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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, knowing it to be).

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: intentionally, knowing it to be.

What would breach regulation 13?

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 Site Waste Management Plans 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
£50,000
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
8 February 2008
In force from
6 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 require any person intending to carry out a construction project with an estimated cost greater than £300,000 to prepare a site waste management plan. The plan must be updated in accordance with the Regulations, with different requirements depending on whether the cost of the project is greater than £500,000. The Regulations are enforced by the Environment Agency and the local authority. Breach of the Regulations is an offence punishable— a on summary conviction, by a fine not exceeding £50,000, or b on conviction on indictment, by a fine. An impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector is available on the Defra 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