header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
19 March 2009 / Claire Andrews
Issue: 7361 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Now for the next Act

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Claire Andrews navigates the Regulatory Enforcement and Sanctions Act 2008

Consumer and food law, with its origins in weights and measures and food legislation dating from Magna Carta and beyond, has traditionally used punishment to deter breach of regulatory standards. In history, death, fines, flogging, the pillory, imprisonment and excommunication have featured variously as punishments for, and therefore deterrents against, certain offences of selling short weight or adulteration of food.

Limited powers

Today's powers to enforce consumer protection, food safety and hygiene laws are more limited. Personified by the modern-day weights and measures inspector—the trading standards officer—and his colleague the environmental health practitioner, local authority regulatory services have continued to enjoy powers which focus on punishment and deterrent through criminal sanctions. Prior to the Enterprise Act 2002 (and its predecessor, the Stop Now Orders (EC Directive) Regulations 2001), enforcement involved prosecuting off enders, cautioning them or taking informal or no action, and in some types of case, limited powers to prevent the off ending activity, including suspension or forfeiture.

The shift from

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Firm awards training contracts to paralegals through internal programme

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Private client disputes specialist joins commercial litigation team

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Cumbria firm appoints new head of residential property

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
NLJ this week: Family law urged to ditch adversarial instincts
Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll