Guideline users should be aware that the Equal Treatment Bench Book covers important aspects of fair treatment and disparity of outcomes for different groups in the criminal justice system. It provides guidance which sentencers are encouraged to take into account wherever applicable, to ensure that there is fairness for all involved in court proceedings.

Where an offender is convicted of an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, the court may order forfeiture and destruction of anything shown to the satisfaction of the court to relate to the offence (Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, s.27(1)).

Guideline users should be aware that the Equal Treatment Bench Book covers important aspects of fair treatment and disparity of outcomes for different groups in the criminal justice system. It provides guidance which sentencers are encouraged to take into account wherever applicable, to ensure that there is fairness for all involved in court proceedings.

Sexual Harm Prevention Orders (SHPO) can be made in relation to a person who has been convicted of an offence listed in either Schedule 3 or Schedule 5 to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 either in the UK or overseas (further details below). This includes offenders whose convictions pre-date the commencement of the 2003 Act (Part 11 Chapter 2 of the Sentencing Code). A SHPO can also be made where a person is found not guilty by reason of insanity or found to be under a disability and to have done the act charged, or cautioned etc. for an offence listed in either Schedule 3 or Schedule 5 to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (s. 103A SOA 2003)

No application is necessary for the court to make a SHPO at the point of sentence although the prosecutor may wish to invite the court to consider making an order in appropriate cases. The court may ask pre-sentence report writers to consider the suitability of a SHPO on a non-prejudicial basis.

In order to make a SHPO, the court must be satisfied that the offender presents a risk of sexual harm to the public (or particular members of the public) and that an order is necessary to protect against this risk. The details of the offence are likely to be a key factor in the court’s decision, together with the offender’s previous convictions and the assessment of risk presented by the Probation Service in any pre-sentence report. The court may take into consideration the range of other options available to it in respect of protecting the public. The court may want to consider:

1. Would an order minimise the risk of harm to the public or to any particular members of the public?
2. Is it proportionate?
3. Can it be policed effectively?

The only prohibitions which can be imposed by a SHPO are those which are necessary for the purpose of protecting the public from sexual harm from the defendant. These can, however, be wide ranging. An order may, for example, prohibit someone from undertaking certain forms of employment such as acting as a home tutor to children. It may also prohibit the offender from engaging in particular activities on the internet. The decision of the Court of Appeal in R v Smith and Others [2011] EWCA Crim 1772 reinforces the need for the terms of a SHPO to be tailored to the exact requirements of the case. SHPOs may be used to limit and manage internet use by an offender, where it is considered proportionate and necessary to do so. The behaviour prohibited by the order might well be considered unproblematic if exhibited by another member of the public – it is the offender’s previous offending behaviour and subsequent demonstration that they may pose a risk of further such behaviour, which will make them eligible for an order.

The order may have effect for a fixed period (not less than five years) or until further order, with the exception of a foreign travel prohibition which must be a fixed period of no more than five years (renewable). Different time periods may be specified for individual restrictions and requirements.

Where an SHPO is made in respect of an offender who is already subject to an SHPO, the earlier SHPO ceases to have effect. If the offender is already subject to a Sexual Offences Prevention Order or Foreign Travel Order made in Scotland or Northern Ireland, that order ceases to have effect unless the court orders otherwise.

Chapter 2 of Part 11 of the Sentencing Code sets out further matters related to making SHPOs.

Consult your legal adviser for guidance.

Availability of Sexual Harm Prevention Orders Available in respect of an offence listed in schedule 3 or 5 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. These include:

• possession of indecent photograph of a child – Criminal Justice Act 1988, s.160;
• sexual assault – Sexual Offences Act 2003, s.3;
• exposure – Sexual Offences Act 2003, s.66;
• voyeurism – Sexual Offences Act 2003, s.67;
• threats to kill – Offences against the Person Act 1861, s.16;
• wounding/causing grievous bodily harm – Offences against the Person Act 1861, s.20;
• assault with intent to resist arrest – Offences against the Person Act 1861, s.38;
• assault occasioning actual bodily harm – Offences against the Person Act 1861, s.47;
• burglary with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm or to do unlawful damage to a building/anything within it – Theft Act 1968, s.9;
• arson – Criminal Damage Act 1971, s.1;
• violent disorder – Public Order Act 1986, s.2;
• affray – Public Order Act 1986, s.3;
• harassment – conduct causing fear of violence – Protection from Harassment Act 1994, s.4;
• racially or religiously aggravated wounding/causing grievous bodily harm – Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s.29;
• racially or religiously aggravated assault occasioning actual bodily harm – Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s.29;
• racially or religiously aggravated common assault – Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s.29;
• racially or religiously aggravated threatening behaviour – Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s.31(1)(a);
• racially or religiously aggravated disorderly behaviour with intent to cause harassment, alarm or distress – Crime and Disorder Act 1998, s.31(1)(b);
• exploitation of prostitution – Sexual Offences Act 2003, ss.52 and 53.

Section 344(2) of the Sentencing Code provides that any conditions in Sch. 3 SOA 2003 relating to the age of the offender or the victim, or the sentence imposed on the offender may be disregarded in making a Sexual Harm Prevention Order.

Guideline users should be aware that the Equal Treatment Bench Book covers important aspects of fair treatment and disparity of outcomes for different groups in the criminal justice system. It provides guidance which sentencers are encouraged to take into account wherever applicable, to ensure that there is fairness for all involved in court proceedings.

Where an offender convicted of one of the following offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, is the owner of an animal in relation to which the offence is committed, the court may make an order depriving the offender of ownership of the animal and for its disposal (Animal Welfare Act 2006, s.33).

1. causing unnecessary suffering (s.4);
2. mutilation (s.5);
3. docking of dogs’ tails (ss.6(1) and 6(2));
4. administration of poisons etc. (s.7);
5. fighting etc. (s.8);
6. breach of duty to ensure welfare (s.9);
7. breach of disqualification order (s.34(9)).

The court is required to give reasons if it decides not to make such an order.

As set out in ss.33(1) and 33(2) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006, deprivation of ownership may be imposed instead of or in addition to dealing with the offender in any other way. The court should consider whether the purposes of sentencing are met when deciding whether to impose the deprivation order as a standalone sentence.

Where an offender is convicted of any of the offences listed above, the court may also disqualify him or her from owning or keeping animals, dealing in animals, and/or transporting animals (Animal Welfare Act 2006, s.34).

Confiscation orders under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 may only be made by the Crown Court. An offender convicted of an offence in a magistrates’ court must be committed to the Crown Court where this is requested by the prosecution with a view to a confiscation order being considered (Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, s.70). If the committal is made in respect of an either way offence, the court must state whether it would have committed the offender to the Crown Court for sentencing had the issue of a confiscation order not arisen.

Guideline users should be aware that the Equal Treatment Bench Book covers important aspects of fair treatment and disparity of outcomes for different groups in the criminal justice system. It provides guidance which sentencers are encouraged to take into account wherever applicable, to ensure that there is fairness for all involved in court proceedings.

The Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 empowers the court to disqualify an offender from being a director or taking part in the promotion, formation or management of a company for up to five years.

An order may be made in two situations:

1. where an offender has been convicted of an indictable offence in connection with the promotion, formation, management, liquidation or striking off of a company (Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, s.2); or
2. where an offender has been convicted of an offence involving a failure to file documents with, or give notice to, the registrar of companies. If the offence is triable only summarily, disqualification can be ordered only where the offender has been the subject of three default orders or convictions in the preceding five years (Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, s.5).

Guideline users should be aware that the Equal Treatment Bench Book covers important aspects of fair treatment and disparity of outcomes for different groups in the criminal justice system. It provides guidance which sentencers are encouraged to take into account wherever applicable, to ensure that there is fairness for all involved in court proceedings.

The court may make an exclusion order where an offender has been convicted of an offence committed on licensed premises involving the use or threat of violence (Licensed Premises (Exclusion of Certain Persons) Act 1980).

The order prohibits the offender from entering specified licensed premises without the consent of the licensee. The term of the order must be between three months and two years.

Guideline users should be aware that the Equal Treatment Bench Book covers important aspects of fair treatment and disparity of outcomes for different groups in the criminal justice system. It provides guidance which sentencers are encouraged to take into account wherever applicable, to ensure that there is fairness for all involved in court proceedings.

Where an offender who holds a personal licence to supply alcohol is charged with a ‘relevant offence’, he or she is required to produce the licence to the court, or inform the court of its existence, no later than his or her first appearance (Licensing Act (“LA”) 2003, s.128(1)).

‘Relevant offences’ are listed in schedule 4 of the Licensing Act 2003; (further details below)

Where the offender is convicted, the court may order forfeiture of the licence or suspend it for up to six months (LA 2003, s129(2)). When deciding whether to order forfeiture or suspension, the court may take account of the offender’s previous convictions for a ‘relevant offence’ (LA 2003, s129(3)).

Whether or not forfeiture or suspension is ordered, the court is required to notify the licensing authority of the offender’s conviction and the sentence imposed (LA 2003, s131).

Forfeiture or suspension of personal liquor licence – Licensing Act 2003, s.129

Available on conviction of a ‘relevant offence’, listed in schedule 4 of the Licensing Act 2003. These include (please note the list below is not exhaustive):

• an offence under the Licensing Act 2003;
• an offence under the Firearms Act 1968;
• theft – Theft Act 1968, s.1;
• burglary – Theft Act 1968, s.9;
• abstracting electricity – Theft Act 1968, s.13;
• handling stolen goods – Theft Act 1968, s.22;
• going equipped for theft – Theft Act 1968, s.25;
• production of a controlled drug – Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, s.4(2);
• supply of a controlled drug – Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, s.4(3);
• possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply – Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, s.5(3);
• permiting premises to be used – Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, s.8
• evasion of duty – Customs and Excise Management Act 1979, s.170 (excluding s.170(1)(a));
• driving/attempting to drive when unfit through drink or drugs – Road Traffic Act 1988, s.4;
• in charge of a vehicle when unfit through drink or drugs – Road Traffic Act 1988, s.4;
• driving/attempting to drive with excess alcohol – Road Traffic Act 1988, s.5;
• in charge of a vehicle with excess alcohol – Road Traffic Act 1988, s.5;
• unauthorised use of trade mark where the goods in question are or include alcohol – Trade Marks Act 1994, ss.92(1) and 92(2);
• sexual assault – Sexual Offences Act 2003, s.3;
• exploitation of prostitution – Sexual Offences Act 2003, ss.52 and 53;
• exposure – Sexual Offences Act 2003, s.66;
• voyeurism – Sexual Offences Act 2003, s.67;
• a violent offence, being any offence which leads, or is intended or likely to lead, to death or to physical injury.

In all cases, consult your legal adviser regarding available orders and their specific requirements and effects

These have now been replaced by Criminal Behaviour Orders.

Guideline users should be aware that the Equal Treatment Bench Book covers important aspects of fair treatment and disparity of outcomes for different groups in the criminal justice system. It provides guidance which sentencers are encouraged to take into account wherever applicable, to ensure that there is fairness for all involved in court proceedings.

The court may make a parenting order where an offender has been convicted of an offence under section 444 of the Education Act 1996 (failing to secure regular attendance at school) and the court is satisfied that the order would be desirable in the interests of preventing the commission of any further offence under that section (Sentencing Code, s.369).

The order may impose such requirements that the court considers desirable in the interests of preventing the commission of a further offence under section 444.

A requirement to attend a counselling or guidance programme as specified by the responsible officer must be included unless the offender has been the subject of a parenting order on a previous occasion.

The term of the order must not exceed 12 months.

Guideline users should be aware that the Equal Treatment Bench Book covers important aspects of fair treatment and disparity of outcomes for different groups in the criminal justice system. It provides guidance which sentencers are encouraged to take into account wherever applicable, to ensure that there is fairness for all involved in court proceedings.

Where goods have been stolen and an offender is convicted of any offence with reference to theft of those goods, the court may make a restitution order (Sentencing Code, s.148). See also Criminal Procedure Rules r.28.7 (external website, this link will not work if you are offline).

The court may:

1. order anyone in possession or control of the stolen goods to restore them to the victim;
2. on the application of the victim, order that goods directly or indirectly representing the stolen goods (as being the proceeds of any disposal or realisation of the stolen goods) be transferred to the victim; or
3. order that a sum not exceeding the value of the stolen goods be paid to the victim out of any money taken out of the offender’s possession on his or her apprehension.