Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T20:38:16.917Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

11 - Day (Unit) Fines in England and Wales

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2021

By
Valsamis Mitsilegas  and
Foivi Sofia Mouzakiti
Edited by
Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko  and
Michael Faure
Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko
Affiliation:
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam
Michael Faure
Affiliation:
Universiteit Maastricht, Netherlands
Get access

Summary

Following a two-decade long conversation, the Criminal Justice Act of 1991 introduced a system of income-related fines in England and Wales, known as ‘unit fines’. This system turned out to be remarkably short-lived. The practical difficulties that surrounded its operation, alongside intense criticism from parts of the media, led not its reform, but instead to its abrupt abolition a few months later. This Chapter begins by discussing the policy rationales that underpinned the adoption of ‘unit fines’ in England and Wales, before taking a closer look into the statutory framework. Then, it explores the reasons why this fining system failed to take roots in England and Wales, by looking at the challenges that followed its implementation. These challenges, coupled with the magistrates’ perception that this system was too rigid, and the growing discontent from parts of the press, led to its rapid demise. Since then, policymakers have considered the possibility of re-introducing income-related fines a number of times, but the idea was never embraced. Unit fines have instead been replaced by a system that sits in the middle of the spectrum between fixed and day fines.

Keywords

England and WalesUnit finesincome-related finesjust desertsCriminal Justice Act of 1991Criminal Justice Act 1993
Type
Chapter
Information
Day Fines in Europe
Assessing Income-Based Sanctions in Criminal Justice Systems
 , pp. 195 - 215
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashworth, A. 1991. ‘The New English Sentencing System’, UC Davis Law Review 25: 755–71.Google Scholar
Ashworth, A. 1993. ‘Sentencing by Numbers?’, Criminal Justice Matters 14: 6–7.Google Scholar
Ashworth, A. 1997. ‘Legislature Vs. Judiciary: The Struggle for Supremacy in English Sentencing’, Federal Sentencing Reporter 10: 275–77.Google Scholar
Ashworth, A. and Wasik, M. 1998. Fundamentals of Sentencing Theory: Essays in Honour of Andrew Von Hirsch. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand.Google Scholar
Ashworth, A. 2015. Sentencing and Criminal Justice. Oxford: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, P. 2003. ‘Managing Offenders, Reducing Crime: A New Approach’, Strategy Unit, 11 December.Google Scholar
Cavadino, M. and Crow, I. 1999. Criminal Justice 2000: Strategies for a New Century. Winchester: Waterside Press.Google Scholar
Cavadino, M. and Dignan, J. 2007. The Penal System: An Introduction. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Charman, E., Gibson, B., Honess, T. and Morgan, R. 1996. Fine Impositions and Enforcement Following the Criminal Justice Act 1993. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
Criminal Justice Act 1991.Google Scholar
Criminal Justice Act 2003.Google Scholar
Crow, I. and Simon, F. 1987. Unemployment and Magistrates’ Courts. London: NACRO.Google Scholar
Crow, I., Cavadino, M., Dignan, J., Johnston, V. and Walker, M. 1994. ‘Magistrates’ Views of the Criminal Justice Act 1991’, Justice of the Peace 158: 37–40.Google Scholar
Crow, I., Cavadino, M., Dignan, J., Johnston, V. and Walker, M. 1996. Changing Criminal Justice: The Impact of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 in Four Areas of the North of England. University of Sheffield, Centre for Criminological and Legal Research.Google Scholar
Default, F. 1981. Report of a Nacro Working Party. London: NACRO.Google Scholar
Doran, A. 1994. ‘Justice for the Middle Classes; Clarke Responds to Public Outrage with a Fairer System of Fines’, Daily Mail, 4 May.Google Scholar
Dunbar, I. and Langdon, A. 1998. Tough Justice: Sentencing and Penal Policies in the 1990s. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dyer, C. 1993. ‘You Finish up with Silly Fines and are Left with No Discretion’, The Guardian, 7 April.Google Scholar
Eriksson, L. and Goodin, R. E. 2007. ‘The Measuring Rod of Time: The Example of Swedish Day‐Fines’, Journal of Applied Philosophy 24: 125–36.Google Scholar
Evans, P. 1989. ‘Fairer Fines Pay Off for Courts’, The Times, 1 May.Google Scholar
Faulkner, D. 2014. Servant of the Crown: A Civil Servant’s Story of Criminal Justice and Public Service Reform. Winchester: Waterside Press.Google Scholar
Flood-Page, C. and Mackie, A. 1998. Sentencing Practice: an Examination of Decisions in Magistrates’ Courts and the Crown Court in the mid–1990s. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
Gibson, B. 1991. ‘Unit Fines – Punishment and Proportionality’, New Law Journal 141: 750–51.Google Scholar
HC Deb 20 March 1988, vol. 130, cols. 1083–97.Google Scholar
HC Deb 20 June 1988, vol. 135, cols. 931–42.Google Scholar
HC Deb 20 February 1991, vol. 186, cols. 404–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HC Deb 15 April 1993, vol. 222, cols. 943–4.Google Scholar
HC Deb 13 May 1993, vol. 224, cols. 939–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HC Deb 29 June 1993, vol. 227, cols. 905–20.Google Scholar
HL Deb 30 November 1988, vol. 502, col. 365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HL Deb 12 March 1991, vol. 527, cols. 102–3.Google Scholar
HL Deb 1 April 1993, vol. 544, cols. 1003–5.Google Scholar
Home Office. 1970. Non‐Custodial and Semi‐Custodial Penalties: Report of the Advisory Council on the Penal System. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Home Office. 1988. Punishment, Custody and the Community. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Home Office. 1990. Crime, Justice and Protecting the Public: The Government’s Proposals for Legislation. London: HMSO, para. 1.6.Google Scholar
Home Office. 1991. Criminal Justice Act 1991: Fines and Other Financial Penalties. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Home Office. 2004. Reducing Crime – Changing Lives. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Home Office. 2006. A Five Year Strategy for Protecting the Public and Reducing Re-offending. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
Home Office. 1993. ‘Cautions, Court Proceedings and Sentencing – England and Wales 1992’, Home Office Statistical Bulletin Issue 24, Table 8.Google Scholar
Home Office. 1993. ‘Monitoring of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 – Data from a Special Data Collection Exercise’, Home Office Statistical Bulletin, Issue 25, p. 5.Google Scholar
Junger-Tas, J. 1994. Alternatives to Prison Sentences: Experiences and Developments. Amsterdam/New York: Kugler Publications.Google Scholar
JUSTICE (British Section of the International Commission of Jurists), 1989. Sentencing: A Way Ahead. London: JUSTICE.Google Scholar
Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, E. 2015. ‘Day-Fines: Should the Rich Pay More?’, Review of Law & Economics 11: 481–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magistrates’ Courts (Unit Fines) Rules 1992.Google Scholar
Ministry of Justice, Criminal Justice Policy Group. 2000. Review of Monetary Penalties in New Zealand.Google Scholar
Ministry of Justice. 2018. Guide to Offender Management Statistics: England and Wales.Google Scholar
Moxon, D., Sutton, M. and Hedderman, C. 1990. Deductions from Benefit for Fine Default. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
Moxon, D., Sutton, M. and Hedderman, C. 1990. Unit Fines: Experiments in Four Courts. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
Moxon, D. and Whittaker, C. 1996. Imprisonment for Fine Default. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
Newburn, T. 2007. ‘“Tough on Crime”: Penal Policy in England and Wales’, Crime and Justice 36: 425–70.Google Scholar
Parliamentary All-Party Penal Affairs Group, 1980. Too Many Prisoners: An Examination of Ways of Reducing the Prison Population. Chichester: Rose.Google Scholar
Penal Affairs Consortium, 1990. Means-Related Fines. London: Penal Affairs Consortium.Google Scholar
Prison Reform Trust and United Kingdom, 1990. Tackling Fine Default. London: Prison Reform Trust.Google Scholar
Raine, J. W. and Dunstan, E. 2009. ‘How Well Do Sentencing Guidelines Work?: Equity, Proportionality and Consistency in the Determination of Fine Levels in the Magistrates’ Courts of England and Wales’, The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice 48: 13–36.Google Scholar
Ramesh, R. 1993. ‘Crisp Pounds £1,200 Fine Rubs Salt in Wound for Litter Bug’, The Guardian 7 April.Google Scholar
Sage, A. 1993. ‘Means-Related Fines Likely to be Curbed’, The Independent 8 March.Google Scholar
Sage, A. 1993. ‘Magistrates to Seek Reform of Unit Fines’, The Independent 4 May.Google Scholar
Sturge, G. 2018. ‘UK Prison Population Statistics’, House of Commons Briefing Paper, Number CBP-04334 (23 July).Google Scholar
The National Archives, PREM 19/2716 (011.jpg), http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C16329001.Google Scholar
Von Hirsch, A. 1986. Past or Future Crimes: Deservedness and Dangerousness in the Sentencing of Criminals. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Von Hirsch, A. 1992. ‘Proportionality in the Philosophy of Punishment’, Crime and Justice 16: 55–98.Google Scholar
Whitehead, P. 2015. Reconceptualising the Moral Economy of Criminal Justice: A New Perspective. London: Springer/Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Warner, K. 2012. ‘Equality before the Law and Equal Impact of Sanctions: Doing Justice to Differences in Wealth and Employment Status’. In Zedner, L. and Roberts, J. V. (eds.), Criminal Justice: Essays in Honour of Andrew Ashworth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×