UK Offence Report

1 An air carriage contractor who fails to comply with an obligation imposed on him by— a any of paragraphs…

regulation 3(1) of The Civil Aviation (Provision of Information to Passengers) Regulations 2006

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

1 An air carriage contractor who fails to comply with an obligation imposed on him by— a any of paragraphs 1, 2, 3 or 6 of Article 11; or b paragraph 2 of Article 12, 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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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 carriage contractor
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 air carriage contractor 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 regulation 3(1)?

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. On these words an offence is committed where a air carriage contractor fails to comply with an obligation imposed on him by— a any of paragraphs 1, 2, 3 or 6 of Article 11; or b paragraph 2 of Article 12.
  2. Not doing what the provision requires under the Civil Aviation (Provision of Information to Passengers) Regulations 2006, by the time it requires it to be done.
  3. Doing it, but not in the manner or to the standard the instrument specifies.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Summary only — tried in a magistrates’ court
Maximum fine
£1,000
Standard scale
Level 3
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined

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
12 December 2006
In force from
16 January 2007
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 create offences for the purpose of enforcing the obligations set out in Chapter III of Council Regulation (EC) No. 2111/2005 (O.J. No. L 344, 27.12.2005, p.15) which require that air passengers be informed of the identity of the operating air carrier or carriers and offered a right of reimbursement or re-routing if the air carrier is subject to an operating ban. Regulation 3 provides that anyone failing to comply with Articles 11 or 12 of the Council Regulation shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine, the maximum amount of which varies depending on the nature of the offence. Regulation 4 provides that it is a defence to demonstrate that all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure compliance with the Council Regulation. This defence is not available where it is unreasonable for a person to have relied on information provided to him. Regulation 5 provides that the members and officers of corporate bodies who have contributed to a failure to comply with the Council Regulation shall also be liable to prosecution. A full regulatory impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business has been produced and a copy placed in the library of both Houses of Parliament. Copies may be obtained from the Department for Transport, 76 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DR. Alternatively, copies can be obtained from the Department for Transport’s website which is at www.dft.gov.uk.

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