UK Offence Report

Any person to whom this regulation applies who, without reasonable excuse– a fails to file air fares in…

regulation 8(2) of The Air Fares Regulations 1992

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 Any person to whom this regulation applies who, without reasonable excuse– a fails to file air fares in accordance with requirements imposed by virtue of paragraph 2 or 3 of article 5 of the Council Regulation; b charges an air fare which the Secretary of State has instructed that carrier to withdraw by virtue of paragraph 3 of article 6 of the Council Regulation, save where that fare is under examination pursuant to article 7 of that Regulation; c fails to abstain from further fare decreases contrary to an instruction from the Secretary of State given by virtue of paragraph 3 of article 6 of the Council Regulation, save where that fare is under examination pursuant to article 7 of that Regulation; d charges an air fare which is not permitted to be in force by virtue of paragraph 3 of article 7 of the Council Regulation; e charges an air fare contrary to a decision of the Commission made pursuant to paragraph 4 or 6 of article 7 of the Council Regulation, save where that decision is under examination by the Council or the Council have taken a different decision; or f charges an air fare contrary to a decision of the Council made pursuant to paragraph 8 of article 7 of the Council Regulation; 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
a person
Conduct
failing to do something the instrument requires
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 a person 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 Any person to whom this regulation applies who, without reasonable excuse– a fails to file air fares in accordance with requirements imposed by virtue of paragraph 2 or 3 of article 5 of the Council Regulation; b charges an air fare which the Secretary of State has instructed that carrier to withdraw by virtue of paragraph 3 of art

What would breach regulation 8(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.

  1. Not doing what the provision requires under the Air Fares Regulations 1992, by the time it requires it to be done.
  2. Doing it, but not in the manner or to the standard the instrument specifies.

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.

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
1 December 1992
In force from
1 January 1993
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 note is not part of the Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

These Regulations make provision for implementing the Community obligations of the United Kingdom provided for in Council Regulation 2409/92 on fares and rates for air services and matters arising out of or related thereto. Save as provided in the Regulations the Secretary of State is specified as the competent authority for the purposes of the Council Regulation (regulation 3). The Civil Aviation Authority (the CAA) is given the functions relating to the filing of air fares that are set out in article 5.2 of the Council Regulation (regulation 4). The CAA is obliged to give notice to the Secretary of State of cases where air fares appear to be excessively high or unduly low (regulation 6). A number of offences are created namely, failure by a carrier to inform the general public on request of its air fares and cargo rates and failure by a carrier or its agent to file air fares or to refrain from charging air fares that the carrier is obliged to withdraw and failure by a carrier or its agent to abstain from fare decreases when required to do so (regulations 7 and 8).

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

Other offences in the same instrument

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