UK Offence Report

The Wine Regulations 2011

regulation 3(11) of The Spirit Drinks, Wine and European Union Withdrawal (Consequential Modifications) (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020

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

11 In regulation 14—

a after paragraph (1) insert— 1A Any person who contravenes the 1416/2006 prohibition is guilty of an offence. ;

b after paragraph (3)(a) insert— aa intentionally to obstruct an authorised officer acting in the enforcement of the 1416/2006 prohibition; .

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (intentionally).

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: intentionally.

What would breach regulation 3(11)?

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 contravenes the 1416/2006 prohibition.
  2. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Spirit Drinks, Wine and European Union Withdrawal (Consequential Modifications) (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020.
  3. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
  4. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

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
23 December 2020
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 Spirit Drinks Regulations 2008 (S.I. 2008/3206), the Wine Regulations 2011 (S.I. 2011/2936) and the European Union Withdrawal (Consequential Modifications) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 (S.I. 2020/1447). Regulation 2 makes amendments to the Spirit Drinks Regulations 2008 in relation to the enforcement of Commission Regulation (EC) No 936/2009 applying the agreements between the European Union and third countries on the mutual recognition of certain spirit drinks (OJ No. L 264, 8.10.2009, p. 5). This includes an amendment making the contravention of Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 936/2009 an offence (regulation 2(3)). Regulation 3 makes amendments to the Wine Regulations 2011 in relation to the enforcement of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1416/2006 laying down specific rules on the implementation of Article 7(2) of the Agreement between the European Community and the United States of America on trade in wine concerning the protection of US names of origin in the Community (OJ No. L 267, 27.9.2006, p. 22). This includes an amendment making the contravention of the first sentence of Article 1 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1416/2006, as read with regulation 6A(2) of the Wine Regulations 2011 (inserted by regulation 3(5)), an offence (regulation 3(11)(a)). Regulation 4 makes amendments to the European Union Withdrawal (Consequential Modifications) (EU Exit) Regulations 2020 to exclude non-ambulatory references in legislation which relates to direct payments from the interpretative provision in the new paragraph 2A of Schedule 8 to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (c. 16). This maintains the existing position regarding such references. An Impact Assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no, or no significant, impact on the private, voluntary or public sectors is foreseen.

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