public nuisance and outraging public decency - Law Commission
public nuisance and outraging public decency - Law Commission
public nuisance and outraging public decency - Law Commission
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Summary: Analysis & Evidence<br />
Policy Option: 3 Description: Abolish the existing offences <strong>and</strong> create new statutory<br />
offences<br />
COSTS<br />
BENEFITS<br />
ANNUAL COSTS<br />
One-off (Transition) Yrs<br />
£ Small 1-2<br />
Average Annual Cost<br />
(excluding one-off)<br />
Description <strong>and</strong> scale of key monetised costs by ‘main<br />
affected groups’<br />
The creation of new offences might generate initial uncertainty <strong>and</strong><br />
some increased litigation while the boundaries are tested.<br />
Otherwise, effects are the same as for option 2.<br />
£ Negligible Total Cost (PV) £<br />
Other key non-monetised costs by ‘main affected groups’<br />
The main suggestion so far for a statutory formula (“act not warranted by law or omission to<br />
discharge a legal duty”) might complicate the law rather than simplifying it. We propose to work<br />
on devising an alternative formula that would avoid this problem.<br />
ANNUAL BENEFITS<br />
One-off Yrs<br />
£<br />
Average Annual Benefit<br />
(excluding one-off)<br />
Description <strong>and</strong> scale of key monetised benefits by ‘main<br />
affected groups’<br />
As for option 2<br />
£ Total Benefit (PV) £<br />
Other key non-monetised benefits by ‘main affected groups’<br />
As for option 2. Also, full codification leads to greater legal certainty in the long run <strong>and</strong> saves the<br />
need for further work if it is later decided to codify the criminal law as a whole.<br />
Key Assumptions/Sensitivities/Risks<br />
Key assumption: that we shall be able to devise a statutory formula which accurately represents the<br />
current law, as modified by our proposals on fault. Risk: that the definition of the act or omission<br />
causing the common injury would create an extra hurdle.<br />
Price Base<br />
Year<br />
Time Period<br />
Years<br />
Net Benefit Range (NPV)<br />
£<br />
78<br />
NET BENEFIT (NPV Best estimate)<br />
£<br />
What is the geographic coverage of the policy/option?<br />
On what date will the policy be implemented?<br />
Engl<strong>and</strong> <strong>and</strong> Wales<br />
Which organisation(s) will enforce the policy? Courts, prosecutors<br />
What is the total annual cost of enforcement for these organisations? £ Negligible<br />
Does enforcement comply with Hampton principles? Not applicable<br />
Will implementation go beyond minimum EU requirements? Not applicable<br />
What is the value of the proposed offsetting measure per year? £ Not applicable<br />
What is the value of changes in greenhouse gas emissions? £ Not applicable<br />
Will the proposal have a significant impact on competition? No<br />
Annual cost (£-£) per organisation<br />
(excluding one-off)<br />
Micro Small Medium Large<br />
Are any of these organisations exempt? Yes/No Yes/No N/A N/A<br />
Impact on Admin Burdens Baseline (2005 Prices)<br />
(Increase - Decrease)<br />
Increase of £ Decrease of £ Net Impact £ None anticipated