UK Offence Report

Amendments to the Food Hygiene (Wales) Regulations 2006

regulation 2(3) of The Food Hygiene (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2014

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

3 In Schedule 6 (restrictions on the sale of raw milk intended for direct human consumption)—

a after paragraph 1, insert the following paragraphs— 1A Any person who sells raw milk in contravention of paragraph 7A commits an offence. 1B Any person who sells raw milk in contravention of paragraph 7B commits an offence. ;

b after paragraph 7, insert the following paragraphs— 7A Except in cases to which paragraph 7B applies, the container in which any raw milk is sold must be marked or labelled with the words “This milk has not been heat-treated and may therefore contain organisms harmful to health.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
selling or supplying something the instrument restricts
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 regulation 2(3)?

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 sells raw milk in contravention of paragraph 7A.
  2. Selling the goods under the Food Hygiene (Wales) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2014 where the instrument prohibits the sale outright.
  3. Supplying without carrying out a check the instrument requires first, even where the sale would otherwise be lawful.
  4. Offering for sale counts as well as selling: displaying stock is enough where the provision reaches an offer.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£5,000
Standard scale
Level 5
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (2014-12-13); the standard scale is keyed to the date the offence was committed, and for conduct today the same words mean an unlimited fine.

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
19 November 2014
In force from
13 December 2014
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, which apply to Wales, amend the Food Hygiene (Wales) Regulations 2006 (S.I. 2006/31 (W. 5)), as already amended) (“the 2006 Regulations”). The Regulations make provision about raw milk, and are therefore related to the requirements provided for by Section IX of Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin (OJ No L 139, 30.04.2004, p 55). Regulation 2 amends Schedule 6 to the 2006 Regulations so as to provide for the continuation in force in Wales of the requirement for the container in which raw milk is sold to be marked or labelled with a health warning. Where raw milk is not prepacked and is sold at a catering establishment, the health warning must appear on a label attached to the container or on a ticket or notice that is readily discernible at the place where the purchaser chooses that milk. Languages in addition to English may be used on the marking or label. The current health warning requirement is provided for by regulation 31 of the Food Labelling Regulations 1996 (S.I. 1996/1499, as amended) (“the 1996 Regulations”). Regulation 31 of the 1996 Regulations will be revoked on 13 December 2014 by regulation 13 of, and Part 1 of Schedule 6 to, the Food Information (Wales) Regulations 2014 (S.I. 2014/2303 (W. 227)). Regulation 2 of these Regulations also provides that any person who sells raw milk in contravention of the health warning requirements is guilty of an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale. The Welsh Ministers’ Code of Practice on the carrying out of Regulatory Impact Assessments was considered in relation to these Regulations. As a result, it was not considered necessary to carry out a regulatory impact assessment as to the likely costs and benefits of complying with these Regulations.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

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 0.96.

Basis
the provision says a person “commits an offence”
Confidence
0.96 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