Exchange and transfer of slots

regulation 9 of The Airports Slot Allocation Regulations 1993

Revoked
Strict liability
Either way
Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harbours

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

9 An air carrier which exchanges or transfers a slot contrary to the requirements of paragraphs 4 or 5 of article 8 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 air carrier
Conduct: breaching the provision
Fault element: Strict liability
Burden of proof: No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

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 air carrier 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.

The provision states no defence, so the prosecution bears the burden on every element of the offence.

Classifier’s reasoning: no word of intention, knowledge, recklessness or negligence in the offence or its provision; other provisions of the same instrument use a mens rea word while this one does not (the Cundy v Le Cocq contrast).

What would breach regulation 9?

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 Airports Slot Allocation Regulations 1993.

Penalty

Mode of trial: Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine: £5,000
Maximum prison (summary): Not determined
Maximum prison (on indictment): 2 years

expressed as the statutory maximum (the prescribed sum): the same words mean £5,000 in England and Wales and £10,000 in Scotland.

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.
Imposition of community and custodial sentences: definitive guideline All courts in England and Wales
When a community order or custody is justified at all, and the presumption against short custodial sentences.
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: Revoked
Revoked by: The Airports Slot Allocation Regulations 2006
Revoked on: 1 January 2007
Made: 14 April 1993
In force from: 12 May 1993
Extent: Not stated

How this was established: the instrument was revoked by a later instrument found in this corpus.

What the instrument is for

These Regulations make provision for implementing the Community obligations of the United Kingdom provided for in Council Regulation (EEC) No. 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports. The airport operator is named the competent authority for the purposes of article 6.1 of the Council Regulation (regulation 2(2)). Provision is made for publication of any determination that an airport be designated a coordinated or a fully coordinated airport, be a coordinated airport for which a coordination committee is set up or be a coordinated airport for which capacity shall be determined (regulations 3 and 7). Provision is made for the appointment of an approved coordinator for a coordinated or fully coordinated airport and his dismissal if he fails to act in an independent manner (regulation 4). In exercising his duties an airport coordinator is bound to have regard to any reservation of slots for regional services effected by the Secretary of State (regulation 5). The airport coordination committee is given the duty of meeting when serious problems for new entrants persist (regulation 8). Offences are created where a person acts as coordinator when not approved as such, where an air carrier fails to give the coordinator requested relevant information and where an air carrier exchanges or transfers slots contrary to the requirements of the Council Regulation (regulations 4(5) and (6), 6, 9, 11 and 12). Provision is made for the giving of notice when the obligations of the Council Regulation are suspended (regulation 10).

Read the full note and every offence in this instrument

Other offences in the same instrument

Airport coordinatorregulation 4(6)
Airport coordinatorregulation 6(1)
Airport coordinatorregulation 6(2)

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 Airports Slot Allocation Regulations 1993 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harboursOther offences on the same subject
Offences created in 1993