UK Offence Report

Use of specimens

rule 84B(2)(b)(ii) of The Armed Forces (Interpretation, Translation and Alcohol and Drug Tests) Rules 2013

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

ii where that corresponding offence is an offence under subsection (2) of section

79 of that Act, would not have been such as to impair his ability to take the action mentioned in subsection (1)(b) of that section;

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
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 person 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 rule 84B(2)(b)(ii)?

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 Armed Forces (Interpretation, Translation and Alcohol and Drug Tests) Rules 2013.

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
2 October 2013
In force from
27 October 2013
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 Rules) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

Rules 1 to 7, 9, 10, 12 to 17 and 19 to 21 of this instrument amend the Armed Forces (Custody Proceedings) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/1098), the Armed Forces (Summary Appeal Court) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/1211), the Armed Forces (Summary Hearing and Activation of Suspended Sentences of Service Detention) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/1216), the Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/2041) and the Armed Forces (Service Civilian Court) Rules 2009 (S.I. 2009/1209) so as to give effect to Directive 2010/64/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the right to interpretation and translation in criminal proceedings. They require the provision, where necessary, of interpretation and translation services for persons accused or convicted of service offences who need such services, including persons with hearing or speech impediments. These amendments come into force on 27th October 2013. Section 11 of the Armed Forces Act 2011 (c. 18) inserts a new Chapter 3A in Part 3 of the Armed Forces Act 2006 (c.52) which provides for the taking and analysis of specimens of breath, blood or urine from persons suspected of certain service offences relating to alcohol or drugs. Rules 8, 11, 18 and 22 of this instrument amend the Armed Forces (Summary Appeal Court) Rules 2009, the Armed Forces (Summary Hearing and Activation of Suspended Sentences of Service Detention) Rules 2009, the Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules 2009 and the Armed Forces (Service Civilian Court) Rules 2009 so as to provide for the use of specimens (whether or not obtained under Chapter 3A of Part 3 of the 2006 Act) in proceedings for those offences. These amendments come into force on 1st November 2013.

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 0.62.

Basis
the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.62 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