Contravention of The Civil Aviation (Investigation of Military Air Accidents at Civil Aerodromes)…
the instrument as a whole of The Civil Aviation (Investigation of Military Air Accidents at Civil Aerodromes) Regulations 2005
- Status not determined
- Strict liability
- Set by another provision
- Courts, police, prisons and the administration of justice
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
Contravening this instrument is an offence under section
61 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982. The instrument itself contains no offence-creating words.
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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
- breaching the provision
- Fault element
- Strict liability
- Burden of proof
- Not determined
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.
Classifier’s reasoning: contravention offences of this kind are strict as to the breach; the fault position is governed by the parent Act and was not read from it.
What would breach the instrument as a whole?
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 Civil Aviation (Investigation of Military Air Accidents at Civil Aerodromes) Regulations 2005.
Penalty
- Mode of trial
- Set by another provision — the instrument states the penalty by reference to an Act or to another regulation
- Maximum fine
- Not determined
- Maximum prison (summary)
- Not determined
The instrument does not state a penalty itself. It sets one by reference to section 61 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982.
the penalty is in the parent Act, not in this instrument.
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.
-
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
- 26 September 2005
- In force from
- 1 November 2005
- 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 replace the Air Navigation (Investigation of Air Accidents involving Civil and Military Aircraft or Installations) Regulations 1986 in so far as they apply to Military Aircraft involved in Accidents or Incidents occurring at Civil Aerodromes only. They do not apply to any Accidents or Incidents involving Civil Registered Aircraft which are covered separately under The Civil Aviation (Investigation of Air Accidents and Incidents) Regulations 1996. The principal differences made by these Regulations are— i to provide for the Chief Inspector to publish or cause to be published at any time information dealing with an investigation to which the Regulations apply (regulation 6). Where such information is contained in a report required to be published by the Chief Inspector pursuant to regulation 13, the power in regulation 6 is subject to the proviso that such information cannot be published if it is likely to have an adverse effect on any person until that person has made representations regarding that information. It can only then be published once the investigating Inspector has made any necessary changes in the light of the representations received (regulation 12). ii To provide for the Chief Inspector to appoint a deputy Inspector for the purposes of an investigation and to delegate his powers and obligations under those Regulations to him (regulation 8). iii To provide for the Chief Inspector to determine the scale of investigations required in an investigation along with procedure to be adopted (regulation 10). In determining the above he is obliged to have regard to the fact that the purpose of the investigation is the prevention of accidents, not the apportionment of blame or liability (regulation 4). iv The introduction of the requirement that any safety recommendation made in the investigation report shall not create a presumption of blame or liability for an accident to which these Regulations apply (regulation 11). v To preclude any person who has been afforded an opportunity to make representations on a proposed analysis of facts and conclusions as to the cause of the accident from disclosing that information or any information contained in the draft report provided to him (regulation12). vi To require that the Chief Inspector endeavour to make any investigation report into an accident public within 12 months or within the shortest time possible and in such manner as he thinks fit (regulation 13). vii To provide that the Chief Inspector shall communicate the accident investigation report to any undertaking or national aviation authority whose military aircraft is involved in an accident to which these Regulations apply. Those bodies are required to consider and where appropriate to act on safety recommendations made and send details of the same to the Secretaries of State for Defence and Transport or explain why any recommendation so made will not be acted upon (regulation 14). viii To require that the investigation of an accident to which these Regulations apply be reopened if in the Chief Inspector’s opinion new and important evidence relating to an accident has been disclosed or if he has any grounds to suspects that the reputation of any person has been unfairly and adversely affected (regulation 15). Copies of Annex 13 9th Edition (July 2001) to the International Convention on Civil Aviation may be obtained from Airplan Flight Equipment Limited, of 1A Ringway Trading Estate, Shadowmoss Road, Manchester, M22 5LH.
Read the full note and every offence in this 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 0.55.
- Basis
- the penalty comes from the enabling Act rather than from this instrument
- Confidence
- 0.55 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 Civil Aviation (Investigation of Military Air Accidents at Civil Aerodromes) Regulations 2005 Every offence this instrument creates, and its explanatory note
- Courts, police, prisons and the administration of justiceOther offences on the same subject
- Offences created in 2005