UK Offence Report

1 A person commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, proof of which lies with the person, the…

article 6(1) of The Plant Health (Sweet Chestnut Blight) (England) Order 2017

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 commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, proof of which lies with the person, the person—

a contravenes article 4(2); or

b intentionally obstructs an inspector in the exercise of the powers given to the inspector by or under 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, proof of which lies with the person, the person— a contravenes article 4(2); or b intentionally obstructs an inspector in the exercise of the powers given to the inspector by or under this Order.

What would breach article 6(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.

  1. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Plant Health (Sweet Chestnut Blight) (England) Order 2017.
  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
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
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.

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
20 February 2017
In force from
21 February 2017
Extent
E

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 introduces specific measures for the control in England of the harmful organism Cryphonectria parasitica (Murrill) Barr, a fungal disease causing sweet chestnut blight. Article 3 makes provision for the Secretary of State and the Forestry Commissioners to demarcate an area in relation to an infestation of sweet chestnut blight following the confirmation of the presence of the disease on any premises. Article 4 prohibits certain movements of susceptible material of Castanea sativa (sweet chestnut) and Quercus L. (oak), without the written authority of a plant health inspector. The prohibition on the movement out of or within the infested area of a demarcated area applies to susceptible material of Castanea sativa and Quercus L. The prohibition on the movement out of or within any controlled area of a demarcated area applies to susceptible material of Castanea sativa. Article 5 contains provisions relating to inspection and enforcement. Article 6 sets out the offences for contravening this Order. A person guilty of an offence under the Order is liable on summary conviction to a fine. An impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no, or no significant, impact on the private, voluntary or public sector is foreseen.

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 “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