UK Offence Report

Offences, penalties and defences

regulation 25(2) of The Merchant Shipping (Small Workboats and Pilot Boats) Regulations 2023

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 Subject to paragraph (3), any offence under paragraph (1) is an offence by the master and the owner of the vessel and is punishable— a on summary conviction— i in England and Wales by a fine; ii in Scotland or Northern Ireland by a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum; b on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or a fine, or both.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 master
Conduct
breaching the provision
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 master 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

In any proceedings for an offence under these Regulations, it is a defence for a person charged to prove that the person charged took all reasonable steps to avoid commission of the offence.

What would breach regulation 25(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.

  1. Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Merchant Shipping (Small Workboats and Pilot Boats) Regulations 2023.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£1,000
Standard scale
Level 3
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

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
20 November 2023
In force from
13 December 2023
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 revoke and replace the Merchant Shipping (Small Workboats and Pilot Boats) Regulations 1998 (S.I. 1998/1609) and the Merchant Shipping (Small Workboats and Pilot Boats) (Amendment) Regulations 2016 (S.I. 2016/354). In these Regulations— Part 1 provides in regulations 1 to 7, for the revocation of earlier Regulations, definitions of terms used and information about the types of vessels to which these Regulations apply, the disapplication of other Regulations, the types of vessels that are exempted and where equivalent standards may apply; Part 2 provides in regulations 8 to 17, for survey and certification of vessels. This includes information on: periodical survey requirements, how applications for certificates may be made and determined and the duration, validity, extension or cancellation of a certificate or prohibitions in relation to certificates; Part 3 provides in regulations 18 to 25, for various changes in circumstances that may arise following certification of the vessel. In particular, these Regulations set out the responsibilities of owners and masters; the requirements to report incidents and deficient vessels; circumstances when vessels may be liable to be detained, the availability of a review or arbitration to settle disputes; and the offences, penalties and defences in relation to any breach of the Regulations; Part 4 provides in regulation 26 and Schedule 2, details of amendments it is necessary to make to other Regulations that are needed in connection with requirements for remotely operated unmanned vessels. Also, regulation 27 provides for a review of these Regulations to be undertaken at least every 5 years. A full impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no, or no significant, impact on the private, voluntary or public sector is foreseen. A copy of any Marine Guidance Note or Merchant Shipping Notice referred to in these Regulations may be obtained free of charge by prior appointment with the Code Vessel Team at the Maritime & Coastguard Agency, Spring Place, 105 Commercial Road, Southampton, SO15 1EG (telephone 020 3817 2000 and email infoline@mcga.gov.uk).

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 0.62.

Basis
the provision says an offence is committed “if” something happens
Confidence
0.62 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