UK Offence Report

Offences and penalties

article 265(5) of The Air Navigation Order 2016

The provision has been revoked and no saving provision preserving liability for earlier conduct was found.

What the provision says

5 Any person who contravenes any provision specified in Part

1 of Schedule

13 is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to

a fine not exceeding level

3 on the standard scale.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
contravening a requirement of the instrument
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 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.

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 265(5)?

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 person contravenes any provision specified in Part 1 of Schedule 13.
  2. Doing the thing the provision prohibits under the Air Navigation Order 2016, whatever the reason for doing it.
  3. Where the requirement is a positive duty, letting the time for performing it pass without performing it.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Either way — magistrates’ court or Crown Court
Maximum fine
£1,000
Standard scale
Level 3
Maximum prison (summary)
Not determined
Maximum prison (on indictment)
2 years

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

The Ministry of Justice records offences under this instrument against offence code 15528 — 15528 - Summary offences under Air Navigation Order 2016. That code may cover several provisions of the instrument, so a count against it is not a count of prosecutions under this provision alone.

No published per-offence figure was found for this provision. Offences created by statutory instrument very largely do not have their own code in the MoJ’s Outcomes by Offence data tool. Absence of a figure is not evidence that the offence is unused.

Status and lifecycle

Current status
Revoked
Revoked by
The Air Navigation (Cosmic Radiation: Protection of Air Crew and Space Crew and Consequential Amendments) Order 2019
Revoked on
7 August 2019
Made
13 July 2016
In force from
25 August 2016
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 Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

This Order consolidates with amendments the provisions of the Air Navigation Order 2009 (S.I. 2009/3015) and takes account of the requirement to apply the provisions of certain of the Annexes to Commission Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 (O.J. No. L 296, 25.10.2012, p.1., and referred to in this Order as the “EASA Air Operations Regulation”) to different categories of aircraft following the expiry of the derogation period permitted under paragraph 3 of Article 10 of that Regulation. Part 1 deals with interpretation, and introduces Schedule 1 containing definitions used throughout the Order. Part 2 sets out the applicability of the Order, including providing for extra-territorial effect in certain situations. Part 3 contains provisions dealing with registration and marking of aircraft. Part 4 deals with airworthiness of aircraft, both initially and on a continuing basis. Part 5 sets out provisions dealing with the operation of aircraft. This imposes specific obligations on the pilot in command of an aircraft, and sets out requirements for aircraft equipment and crew, as well as restrictions on certain types of aerial activity. There are additional requirements for public transport operations. Part 6 deals with arrangements for aircrew, including provisions requiring aircrew to be licensed, and how such licences are granted and maintained. Article 178 also implements article 42 of Council Directive 96/29/Euratom of 13 May 1996, which lays down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionising radiation (O.J. No. L 159, 29.6.96, p.1). Article 178 therefore requires an undertaking established in the United Kingdom which operates aircraft to take appropriate measures to assess the in-flight exposure to cosmic radiation of air crew who are liable to be subject to cosmic radiation in excess of 1 milliSievert per year, to take into account the assessed exposure when organising work schedules and to inform the workers concerned of the health risks their work involves. In accordance with article 10 of that Directive, additional provision is made for air crew who are pregnant so that the dose to the foetus will be as low as reasonably achievable and unlikely to exceed 1 milliSievert during the remainder of the pregnancy. Part 7 deals with arrangements for air traffic services, including the licensing of air traffic controllers and flight information service officers. Part 8 sets requirements for aerodromes and lighting, including a requirement to light objects, such as wind turbine generators, which may prove an obstacle to aircraft. Lights which dazzle or distract pilots, or which are otherwise liable to endanger aircraft, are prohibited. Part 9 specifies which documents and records are required to be maintained and produced. Article 230 also requires an undertaking to keep a record of the assessed exposure of air crew to cosmic radiation for the purposes of Council Directive 96/29/Euratom, to produce that record on request to the Civil Aviation Authority and to supply a copy on request to the air crew concerned. Part 10 sets out prohibited behaviour in connection with aircraft, including in relation to drunkenness, smoking and acting in a disruptive manner. It also provides for Operational Directives and Rules of the Air to be promulgated. Part 11 deals with revocations and savings, consequential amendments and transitional arrangements, and introduces Schedule 14. Part 12 consists of a review provision in article 275, which requires the Secretary of State to review the operation and effect of this Order and publish a report within five years after it comes into force and within every five years after that. Following a review it will fall to the Secretary of State to consider whether this Order should remain as it is, or be revoked or be amended. A further instrument would be needed to revoke the Order or to amend it. A full impact assessment of the effect that this instrument will have on the costs of business and the voluntary sector is available from the Department for Transport, Great Minster House, 33 Horseferry Road, London SW1P 4DR and published with the Explanatory Memorandum alongside the instrument at www.legislation.gov.uk

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.

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