Application of criminal law
article 5(2) of The Channel Tunnel (Arrangements with the Kingdom of the Netherlands) Order 2020
- Status not determined
- Strict liability
- Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harbours
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
2 Any act or omission which—
a takes place inside the United Kingdom in
a control zone and relates to an officer belonging to the Kingdom of the Netherlands; and
b would constitute an offence under
a frontier control enactment if it took place in relation to an officer belonging to the United Kingdom, shall be treated for the purposes of that enactment as if it were an act or omission which had taken place in relation to an officer belonging to the United Kingdom.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
- an officer
- Conduct
- breaching the provision
- 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 an officer 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(2)?
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.
- Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Channel Tunnel (Arrangements with the Kingdom of the Netherlands) Order 2020.
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.
-
Sentencing organisations: fines and the means of a corporate defendant
All courts in England and Wales
How a fine on a company is arrived at from its turnover. Relevant far beyond the guidelines that state it, because a very large share of the offences in this corpus can only be committed by an organisation.
-
Health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter and food safety and hygiene offences: definitive guideline
Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 February 2016
Covers breaches of duty under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the regulations made under it, and food safety and food hygiene offences. Sentencing turns on culpability and on the seriousness and likelihood of harm risked, not only on the harm that happened.
-
Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 June 2017
The sliding scale of credit for pleading guilty, from one third at the first stage of proceedings downwards.
-
General guideline: overarching principles
All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2019
The guideline a court uses when there is no offence-specific guideline, which is the position for the overwhelming majority of offences created by statutory instrument. It sets out how culpability and harm are assessed from first principles.
-
Totality: definitive guideline
All courts in England and Wales
How to sentence more than one offence at once so that the total is just and proportionate - frequently in point here, because regulatory prosecutions commonly charge several breaches of the same instrument.
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
- 27 August 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 Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
This Order implements into United Kingdom law the provisions of the Agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Kingdom of the Netherlands concerning Border Controls on Rail Traffic between the Netherlands and the United Kingdom using the Channel Fixed Link. Those provisions (“the international articles”) are by article 3(1) given the force of law in the United Kingdom within, and for the authorised purposes (see article 2(1)) outside, the control zone accorded to the Netherlands by the international articles (“the Netherlands control zone”). Article 3(2) provides that officers from the Netherlands may to the extent specified in the international articles, go about their business (essentially, the operation of Netherlands frontier controls as defined in the international articles) in the United Kingdom. Article 3(3) ensures that those officers can be provided with the necessary facilities. Article 4(1), by extending relevant enactments to the control zone accorded to the United Kingdom in the Netherlands (“the United Kingdom control zone”), performs the corresponding operation for British officers working there. Article 4(2) applies the Equality Act 2010 (c.15) to the carrying out of functions of United Kingdom immigration officers in a control zone in the Netherlands. Article 4(3) and (4) alters the application of the Data Protection Act 2018 (c.12) so that data processed by United Kingdom officers in the Netherlands control zone are, but data processed by officers from the Netherlands in the United Kingdom control zone are not, subject to that Act. Article 5(1) and (2) extends English criminal jurisdiction to conduct in the United Kingdom control zone which, if taking place in England, would constitute an offence under a frontier control enactment as defined in the Schedule. Article 5(6) creates a presumption as to jurisdiction over offences committed where provision is made under the international articles. Article 6 provides that the frontier control enactments (defined in article 2(1)) have effect for the purposes of this Order with the modifications set out in Schedule 4 to the Channel Tunnel (International Arrangements) Order 1993 (S.I. 1993/1813). Article 7 allows the Secretary of State to charge operators reasonable fees in the tunnel system in relation to their functions under or by virtue of this Order. Article 8 amends article 4 of this Order from IP completion day to take account of changes to data protection provisions arising from the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union. The Schedule sets out the international articles and the attached protocol. A full 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 vote to approve it. A non-fatal motion to object was tabled, which records disapproval without stopping the instrument.
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.
Other offences in the same instrument
- SCHEDULESCHEDULE
- Application of criminal lawarticle 5(2)(b)
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 0.75.
- Basis
- the provision says the conduct “constitutes an offence”
- Confidence
- 0.75 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
- This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
- The Channel Tunnel (Arrangements with the Kingdom of the Netherlands) Order 2020 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harboursOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 2020