UK Offence Report

Acquisition or extension of ownership interest

article 39 of The Syria (Restrictive Measures) (Overseas Territories) Order 2012 (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

39 A credit or financial institution (“P”) commits an offence if P allows

a person, entity or body falling within article 36(4) to acquire or extend

a participation, or acquire any other ownership interest in P.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 financial institution
Conduct
breaching the provision
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 financial 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; other provisions of the same instrument use a mens rea word while this one does not (the Cundy v Le Cocq contrast).

What would breach article 39?

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. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Syria (Restrictive Measures) (Overseas Territories) Order 2012.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Not determined
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

no penalty is stated in this instrument; it may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence.

No penalty was determined from this instrument. It may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence. Absence of a figure here is not evidence that the offence carries no penalty.

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
10 July 2012
In force from
12 July 2012
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.

The Order, made under the Saint Helena Act 1833, the British Settlement Acts 1887 and 1945 and prerogative powers, gives effect in the specified Overseas Territories to the measures adopted by the European Union in Council Decision 2011/782/CFSP adopted on 1 December 2011 (“the Council Decision”) and EU Council Regulation No 36/2012 adopted on 18 January 2012 (“the Council Regulation”), as amended. The Council Decision and Council Regulation repealed and replaced EU sanctions measures in relation to Syria originally adopted in May 2011 (EU Council Decision 2011/273/CFSP and EU Council Regulation 442/2011, as amended), which were previously given effect in the specified Overseas Territories by The Syria (Restrictive Measures) (Overseas Territories) Order 2011 (“the 2011 Order”). The Order revokes the 2011 Order. The Order gives effect, in the specified Overseas Territories, to an asset freeze in relation to persons responsible for the violent repression against the Syrian population in Syria, persons and entities benefiting from or supporting the Assad regime, and associated persons and entities, as listed in Annexes II and IIa to the Council Regulation. The Order also gives effect to an arms embargo and trade restrictions (in relation to specified equipment, goods, technology, software, crude oil, petroleum products, Syrian banknotes and coins, gold, precious metals and diamonds and luxury goods) and to restrictions on financial services.

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 “commits 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