UK Offence Report

Amendment of Part 6: supervision and registration

regulation 7(7) of The Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (Amendment) Regulations 2019

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

Obligation of confidentiality: offence 52B

1 Any person who discloses information in contravention of regulation 52A is guilty of an offence.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
contravening a requirement of the instrument
Fault element
Strict liability
Burden of proof
Legal burden on the defendant

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 gives a defence the defendant must prove, on the balance of probabilities. A legal burden of that kind can be read down to a merely evidential one under section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 where placing it on the defendant would be disproportionate (R v Lambert [2001] UKHL 37; Sheldrake v DPP [2004] UKHL 43).

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

The defence, as drafted

oth. 3 In proceedings for an offence under this regulation, it is a defence for the accused to prove— a that the accused did not know and had no reason to suspect that the information was confidential information; and b that the accused took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to avoid committing the offence. .

What would breach regulation 7(7)?

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. On these words an offence is committed where a person discloses information in contravention of regulation 52A.
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (Amendment) Regulations 2019, whatever the reason for doing it.
  3. Where the requirement is a positive duty, letting the time for performing it pass without performing it.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
Unlimited
Maximum prison (summary)
3 months
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

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
19 December 2019
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 Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations amend the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (S.I. 2017/692) (“the MLRs”). They implement amendments made to Directive 2015/849/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20th May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing (“the fourth money laundering directive”) by Directive 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30th May 2018. In particular, regulations 3 and 4 amend Parts 1 and 2 of the MLRs to add new categories of “relevant person” as defined in regulation 8 of the MLRs and referred to as “obliged entities” in the fourth money laundering directive. The new businesses covered by the legislation are letting agents, art market participants (including operators of freeports), and providers of exchange or storage services for “cryptoassets” (as defined in new regulation 14A) such as virtual currencies. The definition of tax adviser is extended to those who provide material aid or assistance on tax. Regulation 4 also amends Part 2 of the MLRs to implement new provisions in the fourth money laundering directive relating to risk assessments, policies, controls and procedures; and to make provision about training for agents under regulation 24 of the MLRs; about publishing directions under regulation 25; and about measures to be taken by supervisors to check the criminal convictions of people they approve under regulation 26. Regulation 5 amends Part 3 of the MLRs in relation to customer due diligence measures to be taken by relevant persons. Regulation 6 inserts a new Part 5A into the MLRs to require the Treasury or the Secretary of State to establish a mechanism to enable law enforcement authorities and the Gambling Commission to obtain information about safe-deposit boxes and about accounts held with banks, building societies and credit unions. Regulation 7 amends Part 6 of the MLRs in relation to the duties of supervisory authorities; information sharing; and requirements for certain businesses to register with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (“HMRC”) or with the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”). Regulation 8 amends Part 8 of the MLRs in relation to information and investigation, in particular conferring new powers on the FCA in relation to cryptoasset service providers; regulation 9 amends Part 9 of the MLRs in relation to enforcement and Part 10 of the MLRs in relation to appeals against directions imposed by the FCA. Regulations 10 and 13 insert a new Schedule 6A into the MLRs in relation to information-sharing between financial intelligence units including the UK’s National Crime Agency. Regulation 11 amends Schedule 4 to the MLRs in relation to information to be collected by supervisory authorities. Regulation 12 amends Schedule 6 to the MLRs, which sets out which provisions of the MLRs are “relevant requirements” for the purpose of enforcement action by HMRC or the FCA under Part 9. Regulations 14 to 20 make consequential amendments to the Terrorism Act 2000 (c.11), the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (c.29), the Companies Act 2006 (c.46) and related secondary legislation and the Electronic Money Regulations 2011 (S.I. 2011/99). An impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business, the voluntary sector and the public sector will be available from HM Treasury at 1 Horse Guards Road, London SW1A 2HQ when it is published.

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 0.92.

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