UK Offence Report

Amendment of the Protection of the Euro against Counterfeiting Regulations 2001

regulation 2(4) of The Protection of the Euro against Counterfeiting (Amendment) Regulations 2011

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

4 After regulation

3 insert— 3A

1 An institution or economic agent referred to in Article 6(1) of the Community Regulation, which fails to ensure that euro notes and euro coins which it has received and which it intends to put back into circulation are checked for authenticity by trained personnel or by

a machine authorised for that purpose by the European Central Bank, in the case of banknotes, or the European Commission, in the case of coins, shall be guilty of an offence and liable—

a on summary conviction, to

a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum; or

b on conviction on indictment, to

a fine. .

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 institution
Conduct
failing to do something the instrument requires
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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 institution 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.

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision.

What would breach regulation 2(4)?

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. Not doing what the provision requires under the Protection of the Euro against Counterfeiting (Amendment) Regulations 2011, by the time it requires it to be done.
  2. Doing it, but not in the manner or to the standard the instrument specifies.

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
8 December 2011
In force from
31 December 2011
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 make provision relating to the enforcement of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1338/2001, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2009. These Regulations amend the Protection of the Euro against Counterfeiting Regulations 2001 (“the 2001 Regulations”), so that it is a criminal offence for banks and certain other financial institutions to fail to comply with the requirement in Article 6(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1338/2001, as amended, to ensure that euro notes and coins are checked for authenticity. The Regulations also amend the category of persons who commit an offence under the 2001 Regulations if they fail to comply with the other requirements of Council Regulation (EC) No. 1338/2001, reflecting amendments made to that Regulation by Council Regulation (EC) No. 44/2009. The Regulations set out the maximum penalties which can be imposed on persons convicted of those offences. Regulation 3 requires the Treasury to review the operation and effect of these Regulations and publish a report within five years after they come into force and within every five years after that. Following a review it will fall to the Treasury to consider whether the Regulations should remain as they are, or be revoked or be amended. A further instrument would be needed to revoke the Regulations or to amend them. An Impact Assessment of the effect that these Regulations will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector is available on the Treasury’s website (hm-treasury.gov.uk) and is published with the Explanatory Memorandum alongside these Regulations on the legislation.gov.uk 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