UK Offence Report

Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Rules 2015

article 4(a) of The Criminal Procedure (Amendment No. 3) Rules 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

a in rule 3.13 (Pre-trial hearings: general rules)—

i renumber paragraphs (2) and (3) as (3) and (4) respectively, and

ii after paragraph (1) insert—

2 At the plea and trial preparation hearing the court must―

a satisfy itself that there has been explained to the defendant, in terms the defendant can understand (with help, if necessary), that the defendant will receive credit for

a guilty plea;

b take the defendant’s plea or if no plea can be taken then find out whether the defendant is likely to plead guilty or not guilty;

c unless the defendant pleads guilty, satisfy itself that there has been explained to the defendant, in terms the defendant can understand (with help, if necessary), that at the trial―

i the defendant will have the right to give evidence after the court has heard the prosecution case,

ii if the defendant does not attend, the trial may take place in the defendant’s absence,

iii if the trial takes place in the defendant’s absence, the judge may inform the jury of the reason for that absence, and

iv where the defendant is released on bail, failure to attend court when required is an offence for which the defendant may be arrested and punished and bail may be withdrawn; and

d give directions for an effective trial. ;

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
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 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 article 4(a)?

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 Criminal Procedure (Amendment No. 3) Rules 2017, 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
Not determined
Maximum fine
Not determined
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

no penalty is stated here: this instrument amends another one, and the penalty for the offence is in the instrument being amended.

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
17 July 2017
In force from
Not determined
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.

These Rules amend the Criminal Procedure Rules 2015, S.I. 2015/1490, as follows: Rule Amendment Part 3 Rule 3.13 is amended to require the Crown Court at the plea and trial preparation hearing to ensure that explanations have been given to the defendant about credit for a guilty plea and about the potential consequences of failing to attend the trial. A new note is added to rule 3.21 to draw attention to the potential consequences of trying together offences that should be tried separately. Part 4 Rule 4.11 is amended to allow service of documents in extradition appeal proceedings by electronic means (for example, by email) to have effect on the same business day if they are sent at a later time than in other criminal proceedings (by 4.30pm instead of by 2.30pm). Part 18 Rules 18.24 and 18.25, which provide the procedure on applications for witnesses to attend court by live video link in some circumstances, are amended to provide for European investigation orders under the Criminal Justice (European Investigation Order) Regulations 2017. Part 33 Rule 33.24 is amended to allow for the new scope of applications under section 67 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Seized money). That section is amended by the Criminal Finances Act 2017 to allow money seized by investigators to be applied towards payment of a confiscation order. Part 47 Rule 47.1 is amended in consequence of the addition of seven new rules, 47.59 to 47.65. Rules 47.4, 47.9, 47.11, 47.12, 47.14, 47.16, 47.17, 47.18, 47.20, 47.22 and 47.32 are amended in consequence of amendments made by the Criminal Finances Act 2017 to the Acts to which those rules refer. Rule 47.13 is amended to provide for applications to the Crown Court under new Schedule 5A to the Terrorism Act 2000. Rules 47.59, 47.60 and 47.61 are added to provide for applications to magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court for European investigation orders under the Criminal Justice (European Investigation Order) Regulations 2017. Rules 47.62, 47.63, 47.64 and 47.65 are added to provide for applications to the Crown Court under new section 336A of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Power of court to extend the moratorium period; the section applies where consent is required for doing an act that, without consent, would be a money laundering offence). Part 49 Rules 49.14, 49.15, 49.16 and 49.17 are added to provide for the procedure where a magistrates’ court or the Crown Court is nominated to give effect to a European investigation order under the Criminal Justice (European Investigation Order) Regulations 2017. Amendments to cross-references. The following rules, and notes to rules (‘n’), of the Criminal Procedure Rules are amended to correct cross-references that they contain: 3.24, 12.1(n), 24.1(n), 47.43, 47.44, 47.45, 47.52, 47.53, 47.57, 48.5 and 48.9. The amendments to Parts 18, 47 and 49 that provide for European investigation orders come into force on 31st July 2017 and the other changes made by these Rules come into force on 2nd October 2017.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

How this became law

This instrument became law without a debate or a vote. Under the negative procedure it took effect unless a motion to stop it succeeded, and none was tabled.

Neither House could have amended it. A statutory instrument is put to each House as a whole thing, to be approved or not; the Houses can reject an instrument or record their regret, but they cannot change a word of it. That is the constitutional position for every offence on this site.

The full procedural history →

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 0.88.

Basis
the provision says the conduct “is an offence”; the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.88 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