UK Offence Report

Freezing prohibitions: offences

article 5(1) of The Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitri Kovtun Freezing Order 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

1 A person referred to in article 1(3) who fails to comply with

a prohibition imposed by article

4 commits 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
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 5(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. On these words an offence is committed where a person fails to comply with a prohibition imposed by article 4.
  2. Not doing what the provision requires under the Andrey Lugovoy and Dmitri Kovtun Freezing Order 2020, by the time it requires it to be done.
  3. 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 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
17 January 2020
In force from
19 January 2020
Extent
E+W+S+NI

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 is made under the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 (“the Act”) (c.24) to impose a freeze on funds in relation to Andrey Lugovoy (AL) and Dmitri Kovtun (DK). By virtue of section 8 of the Act, this Order expires at the end of the period of two years beginning with the day on which it is made. Article 3 provides that a specified person may request the reason why they are specified. Article 4 prohibits any person from making funds available to or for the benefit of AL or DK. It also makes provision prohibiting anyone, including AL and DK, from dealing with funds owned, controlled or held by AL or DK. Article 5 makes it an offence to breach the prohibition on making funds available or to engage in activity knowing or intending that it will enable or facilitate the commission of such an offence, subject to a defence based on no knowledge or reasonable suspicion of the relevant circumstances. Article 6 provides for the Treasury to be able to grant licences to disapply the prohibitions and article 7 makes provision in relation to licensing procedure. Article 8 gives effect to the Schedule which makes provision about information and disclosure of information. Article 9 sets the penalties for offences under the Order, article 10 makes provision relating to criminal proceedings and article 11 relates to offences by bodies corporate and Scottish partnerships. Article 12 makes provision about the service of notices. Article 13 makes provision for supplemental amendments arising from this Order. A full impact assessment has not been prepared 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 became law

Both Houses had to approve this instrument before it could take effect, and did so.

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 →

What Parliament said

Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

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 “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