Power to prevent aircraft flying

article 11(2) of The Air Navigation (Noise Certification) Order 1990

Status not determined
Strict liability
Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harbours

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

2 If the operator or the commander of an aircraft fails without reasonable excuse to comply with
a direction given to him pursuant to paragraph (1) of this article, he shall be guilty of an offence.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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: an operator
Conduct: breaching the provision
Fault element: Strict liability
Burden of proof: An element of the offence, for the prosecution to prove

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 an operator 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.

“Without reasonable excuse” here is an element of the offence rather than a defence, so its absence is for the prosecution to prove (R v Charles [2009] EWCA Crim 1570).

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision; qualified by reasonable excuse (an element; prosecution disproves once raised).

The defence, as drafted

2 If the operator or the commander of an aircraft fails without reasonable excuse to comply with a direction given to him pursuant to paragraph (1) of this article, he shall be guilty of an offence.

What would breach article 11(2)?

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.

Doing what the provision prohibits, or failing to do what it requires under the Air Navigation (Noise Certification) Order 1990.

Penalty

Mode of trial: Not determined
Maximum fine: Not determined
Maximum prison (summary): Not determined

no penalty is stated in this instrument; it may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence.

No penalty was determined from this instrument. It may be in the enabling Act, or in a general penalties provision this pass did not connect to the offence. Absence of a figure here is not evidence that the offence carries no penalty.

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.

Sentencing organisations: fines and the means of a corporate defendant All courts in England and Wales
How a fine on a company is arrived at from its turnover. Relevant far beyond the guidelines that state it, because a very large share of the offences in this corpus can only be committed by an organisation.
Health and safety offences, corporate manslaughter and food safety and hygiene offences: definitive guideline Magistrates' courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales · in force from 1 February 2016
Covers breaches of duty under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the regulations made under it, and food safety and food hygiene offences. Sentencing turns on culpability and on the seriousness and likelihood of harm risked, not only on the harm that happened.
Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 June 2017
The sliding scale of credit for pleading guilty, from one third at the first stage of proceedings downwards.
General guideline: overarching principles All courts in England and Wales · in force from 1 October 2019
The guideline a court uses when there is no offence-specific guideline, which is the position for the overwhelming majority of offences created by statutory instrument. It sets out how culpability and harm are assessed from first principles.
Totality: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales
How to sentence more than one offence at once so that the total is just and proportionate - frequently in point here, because regulatory prosecutions commonly charge several breaches of the same instrument.

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: 24 July 1990
In force from: 1 August 1990
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 Order revokes and replaces the Air Navigation (Noise Certification) Order 1987. In addition to some minor and drafting amendments the following change is made:— A subsonic aeroplane registered in the United Kingdom after 1st November 1990 and powered by turbojet or turbofan engines which either has a maximum total weight authorised of more than 34,000kg or is capable of seating more than 19 passengers is prohibited from taking off or landing in the United Kingdom or in any other Member State of the European Community unless there is in force in respect of that aeroplane a noise certificate issued by the CAA certifying that the aeroplane complies with the applicable standards specified in article 6(3) of the Order (article 5(2)). The publication British Civil Airworthiness Requirements Section N — Noise Issue 5 and the Convention on International Civil Aviation referred to in article 3 can be purchased from the Civil Aviation Authority, Greville House, 37 Gratton Road, Cheltenham, Glos GL50 2BN.

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

What Parliament said

Mentions of this instrument in Hansard. Parliamentary material is reused under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0.

Statutory Instruments, &C Commons · 3 July 1990
Ordered, That the draft Air Navigation (Noise Certification) Order 1990 be referred to a Standing Committee on Statutory Instruments, &c. [Mr. Patnick.]
Civil Aviation Commons · 12 July 1990
Motion made and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(5) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.). That the draft Air Navigation (Noise Certification) Order 1990, which was laid before this House on 27th June, be approved.— [Mr. Lightbown.]
Business Lords · 19 July 1990 · Viscount Davidson
My Lords, it may be for the convenience of the House to know that the Committee stage of the Broadcasting Bill will be adjourned at about 7 p.m. for about one hour and that during this adjournment the Meat and Livestock Commission Levy (Variation) Scheme (Confirmation) Order 1990, the Sea Fish Industry Authority (Levy Powers) Order 1990 and the Air Navigation (Noise Certification) Order 1990 will be taken.
Helicopter Flights (London) Commons · 15 January 2007 · Gillian Merron
I am happy to come back to the hon. Lady on the general point, but for example, deviation is common on emergency operations. The issue is broad, and I am happy to return to her on it. On compliance with the regulations, all helicopter flights in the controlled air space over London are subject to an air traffic control clearance, and single-engine helicopters flying routes are subject to particular visibility…

Other offences in the same instrument

Penaltiesarticle 14(3)
Penaltiesarticle 14(4)

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 0.92.

Basis: the provision says a person is “guilty of an offence”
Confidence: 0.92 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

This provision on legislation.gov.uk The authoritative text. Check it before relying on anything here.
The Air Navigation (Noise Certification) Order 1990 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harboursOther offences on the same subject
Offences created in 1990