Obstruction of officers
article 16(1) of The Sea Fishing (Landing and Weighing of Herring, Mackerel and Horse Mackerel) Order 2009 (revoked)
- Status not determined
- Requires proof of a state of mind
- Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheries
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 that person—
a fails without reasonable excuse to comply with any requirement imposed by
a British sea-fishery officer under the powers conferred by this Order;
b without reasonable excuse, prevents, or attempts to prevent, any other person from complying with any such requirement;
c assaults an officer who is exercising any of the powers conferred by this Order; or
d intentionally obstructs an officer in the exercise of any of the powers conferred by this Order.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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).
“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: intentionally; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).
The defence, as drafted
1 A person is guilty of an offence if that person— a fails without reasonable excuse to comply with any requirement imposed by a British sea-fishery officer under the powers conferred by this Order; b without reasonable excuse, prevents, or attempts to prevent, any other person from complying with any such requirement; c assaults an officer w
What would breach article 16(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.
- Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Sea Fishing (Landing and Weighing of Herring, Mackerel and Horse Mackerel) Order 2009.
- Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
- Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.
Penalty
- Mode of trial
- Not determined
- Maximum fine
- Unlimited
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
'to a fine' with no stated maximum.
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.
-
Sentencing organisations: fines and the means of a corporate defendant
All courts in England and Wales
How a fine on a company is arrived at from its turnover. Relevant far beyond the guidelines that state it, because a very large share of the offences in this corpus can only be committed by an organisation.
-
Environmental offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 July 2014
Covers unauthorised or harmful deposit, treatment or disposal of waste, illegal discharges to air, land and water, and the equivalent offences committed by organisations. It is the guideline that introduced turnover bands for corporate fines, so the size of the defendant company is a starting point rather than a mitigating detail.
-
Health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter and food safety and hygiene offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 February 2016
Covers breaches of duty under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the regulations made under it, and food safety and food hygiene offences. Sentencing turns on culpability and on the seriousness and likelihood of harm risked, not only on the harm that happened.
-
Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 June 2017
The sliding scale of credit for pleading guilty, from one third at the first stage of proceedings downwards.
-
General guideline: overarching principles
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2019
The guideline a court uses when there is no offence-specific guideline, which is the position for the overwhelming majority of offences created by statutory instrument. It sets out how culpability and harm are assessed from first principles.
-
Totality: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales
How to sentence more than one offence at once so that the total is just and proportionate - frequently in point here, because regulatory prosecutions commonly charge several breaches of the same instrument.
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 July 2009
- In force from
- 12 August 2009
- 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 Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
This Order makes provision for the enforcement of restrictions and obligations relating to the landing and weighing of herring, mackerel and horse mackerel contained in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1542/2007 (OJ No L 337, 21.12.2007, p. 56) (“the Commission Regulation”). Article 4 designates the ports for the landing of herring, mackerel and horse mackerel. Article 5 designates the competent authority for purposes of the Commission Regulation. Article 6 provides that the Secretary of State may approve a weighing system for weighing herring, mackerel or horse mackerel, and article 7 provides that it is an offence for a person to fail to comply with provisions of the Commission Regulation relating to the weighing of fresh fish. Article 8 provides that it is an offence to contravene, or fail to comply with, the provisions of the Commission Regulation specified in the Schedule. These offences relate to the landing of herring, mackerel and horse mackerel in designated ports, the keeping and production of documents relating to the catch, the procedures for weighing of fresh and frozen fish, and the labelling of frozen fish. Article 9 sets out the penalties for an offence contained in this Order, and article 10 contains provisions relating to the recovery of fines. Articles 11 to 14 set out the powers of British sea-fishery officers in relation to the enforcement of this Order. Article 19 contains a revocation. An impact assessment of the effect that this Order will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector is available from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Sea Fisheries Conservation Division, Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR.
Read the full note and every offence in this instrument
Other offences in the same instrument
- Approval of weighing systemsarticle 6(4)
- Weighing of fresh herring, mackerel and horse mackerelarticle 7(1)
- The person in charge of a fishing boat is guilty of an offence if, in relation to that boat, the person…article 8(1)
- A person is guilty of an offence if that person fails to comply with a provision of the Commission…article 8(2)
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
- This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
- The Sea Fishing (Landing and Weighing of Herring, Mackerel and Horse Mackerel) Order 2009 (revoked) Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Health and safety, environment, waste and fisheriesOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 2009