2 A Community air carrier which fails to ensure that: a the information required to be made available on…
article 6(2) of Air Carrier Liability Order 1998
- 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The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.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
2 A Community air carrier which fails to ensure that: a the information required to be made available on request to passengers by paragraph 2 of Article 6 of the Council Regulations is so made available; or b its ticket document or an equivalent contains the summary of the requirements contained in Articles 3 and 5 of the Council Regulation as required by paragraph 2 of Article 6 of that Regulation, shall be guilty of an offence unless it proves that the failure to do so occurred without its consent or connivance and that it exercised all due diligence to prevent the failure.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 community air carrier
- Conduct
- failing to do something the instrument requires
- 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 community 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.
What would breach article 6(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.
- Not doing what the provision requires under the Air Carrier Liability Order 1998, by the time it requires it to be done.
- Doing it, but not in the manner or to the standard the instrument specifies.
Penalty
- Mode of trial
- Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
- Maximum fine
- £5,000
- Standard scale
- Level 5
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
this is the level 5 value when the instrument came into force (1998-10-17); the standard scale is keyed to the date the offence was committed, and for conduct today the same words mean an unlimited fine.
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 Air Carrier Liability Regulations 2004
- Revoked on
- 28 June 2004
- Made
- 21 July 1998
- In force from
- 17 October 1998
- Extent
- Not stated
How this was established: the instrument was revoked by a later instrument found in this corpus.
What the instrument is for
(This note is not part of the Regulations) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.
This Order implements Council Regulation (EC) No. 2027/97 of 9th October 1997 on air carrier liability in the event of accidents. The principal provisions are as follows— 1 The limits on carrier liability imposed by the Warsaw Convention (the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules relating to International Carriage by Air signed at Warsaw on 12th October 1929), the Warsaw Convention as amended at The Hague on 28th September 1955 and the Convention supplementary to the Warsaw Convention done at Guadalajara on 18th September 1961 in the event of passenger death, wounding or bodily injury are removed in relation to Community air carriers from the Carriage by Air Act 1961 and the Carriage by Air Acts (Application of Provisions) Order 1967 (articles 3 and 4 respectively). 2 The minimum liability limit required by regulation 11(1)(b) of the Licensing of Air Carriers Regulations 1992 is deleted (article 5). 3 Community air carriers are no longer entitled to rely on the defence in Article 20(1) of the Warsaw Convention (or that Convention as amended) (taking all necessary measures to avoid the damage or that it was impossible to take such measures) in relation to damages for passenger death, wounding or bodily injury of up to 100,000 Special Drawing Rights (articles 3 and 4). 4 Criminal offences are created for the breach of certain requirements set out in Article 6 of the Council Regulation (article 6).
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.
-
Civil Aviation
Commons · 29 June 1998
That the draft Air Carrier Liability Order 1998, which was laid before this House on 23rd June, be approved.— [Janet Anderson.]
-
Carriage By Air Acts (Application Of Provisions) (Fifth Amendment) Order 1999
Lords · 15 April 1999 · Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for her clear explanation of the orders and also to the noble Baroness, Lady Thomas of Walliswood, for saying that I have the last word. I do not really have the last word on this matter—in a way. we have all had the last word. The first order has taken 25 years to come before the House. Not only that, I understand that next month a new convention will be discussed that may…
-
Air Carrier Liability Order 1998
Lords · 5 May 1999 · Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that response. How could it be that the commission could propose, and the Government agree, to a regulation which was found to be incompatible with the prior treaty commitments of member states under the Warsaw Convention? Now that the judge has concluded that the European Council regulation is held in suspense, what therefore is the status of the Air Carrier Liability…
-
Air Carrier Liability Order 1998
Lords · 5 May 1999 · Lord Whitty
My Lords, the Government welcome the judgment given by the honourable Mr. Justice Jowitt since he expressed "complete confidence" in the validity of the Council Regulation 2027/97. He declined to refer the question of its validity to the European Court of Justice and he dismissed IATA's request for judicial review. Furthermore, since the judgment made no order as to the validity of the Air Carrier Liability Order…
Other offences in the same instrument
- A Community air carrier which fails to include the provisions contained in Articles 3 and 5 of the Council…article 6(1)
- A non-Community carrier which does not apply the provisions in Articles 3 and 5 of the Council Regulation…article 6(3)
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.
- Air Carrier Liability Order 1998 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Transport: maritime, aviation, rail and harboursOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 1998