UK Offence Report

Failure to comply with directions

article 7(1) of The Chichester Harbour Revision Order 2025

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 who fails to comply with

a general direction or

a special direction is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

4 on the standard scale.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 comply with a notice or direction
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 7(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 general direction or a special direction.
  2. Being served with a notice under the Chichester Harbour Revision Order 2025 and doing nothing by the date it specifies.
  3. Doing part of what the notice requires, where it required all of it.
  4. Disagreeing with the notice and ignoring it, rather than using whatever appeal the instrument provides.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£2,500
Standard scale
Level 4
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

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 June 2025
In force from
11 July 2025
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 empowers the Chichester Harbour Conservancy (“the Conservancy”) as harbour authority for Chichester Harbour to extend the limits of the harbour to include the harbour premises (article 11). Illustrative plans (defined in article 11) showing the harbour limits (including the harbour premises) may be inspected during office hours at the harbour office of the Conservancy at the Harbour Office, Itchenor, Chichester PO20 7AW and on the harbour website (www.conservancy.co.uk). This Order confers on the Conservancy and the harbour master (defined in article 2) powers of general direction and special direction for the regulation and management of the harbour (articles 3 to 9). The powers of general direction are extended to include the regulation of vehicles in the harbour and provision is made for a register of all in force general directions which may be inspected during office hours at the harbour office of the Conservancy (article 3) and on the harbour website. This Order creates an offence of failing to comply with special directions or general directions, the penalty for which is a fine on summary conviction not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale (article 7). A defence of due diligence is available to a person charged under article 7 (article 7). The Order amends the definition of vessel contained in subsection (1) of section 3 (interpretation) of the Chichester Harbour Act 1971 (c. lxx) to modernise the definition of vessel contained within it so that it applies to all vessels. It also amends the charging power in section 71 (power to make certain charges) of the Chichester Harbour Act 1971 and removes a reference to ‘navigated’ in section 72 (harbour charges leviable in certain adjoining waters) of the Chichester Harbour Act 1971 (article 12). An impact assessment has not been prepared for this Order as there is no, or no significant, impact predicted on businesses, charities, voluntary bodies or the public sector. An Explanatory Memorandum is available alongside the instrument on the UK legislation website, www.legislation.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 →

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