UK Offence Report

6 If a person required to furnish information by virtue of subsection (3) fails to comply with the…

SCHEDULE of The Civil Aviation Act 1982 (Overseas Territories) Order 2021

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

6 If a person required to furnish information by virtue of subsection (3) fails to comply with the requirement or in purported compliance with the requirement knowingly or recklessly furnishes information which is false in a material particular, then— a in the case of a first failure to comply with the requirement he shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine of an amount not exceeding £1000, or its equivalent in the currency of the Territory; b in any other case he shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both; and a person who fails to comply with a requirement imposed on him in pursuance of subsection (3) shall be guilty of an offence by virtue of paragraph (a) of this subsection notwithstanding that at any relevant time he is outside the Territory and is neither a United Kingdom national nor a body incorporated under the law of the Territory.

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 This is the text as originally made; later amendments are not shown here.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
obstructing an official exercising a power
Fault element
Requires proof of a state of mind
Burden of proof
No statutory defence — prosecution proves everything

The prosecution must prove both that the conduct happened and that it was done with the state of mind the provision names (knowingly, knowingly or recklessly, recklessly).

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

Classifier’s reasoning: mens rea word in the offence-creating words: knowingly, recklessly, knowingly or recklessly.

What would breach SCHEDULE?

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 fails to comply with a requirement imposed on him in pursuance of subsection (3).
  2. Refusing to let an inspector onto premises they are entitled to enter under the Civil Aviation Act 1982 (Overseas Territories) Order 2021.
  3. Sending an official away, or telling staff to say nothing, where the power being exercised does not depend on anyone's consent.
  4. Physically blocking an examination, or removing something an officer has said they intend to inspect.

Penalty

Mode of trial
Not determined
Maximum fine
Not determined
Standard scale
Level 3
Maximum prison (summary)
2 years

the level is stated but no money value is given: this instrument extends outside the United Kingdom, where the standard scale set by s.122(1) of the Sentencing Act 2020 does not run.

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
28 April 2021
In force from
26 May 2021
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 Order) — the explanatory note published with the instrument, © Crown copyright.

This Order makes provision about the application of certain provisions of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 (“the Act”) to Anguilla and to Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands (“the Pitcairn Islands”). Article 2 and the Schedule extend certain provisions of the Act to Anguilla and to the Pitcairn Islands with the modifications specified in the Schedule. Articles 3 and 4 make consequential amendments to remove references to Anguilla and the Pitcairn Islands from the Civil Aviation Act 1982 (Overseas Territories) Order 2001 (S.I. 2001/1452) and the Civil Aviation Act 1982 (Overseas Territories) (No. 2) Order 2001 (S.I. 2001/3367). Those Orders extended to Anguilla and to the Pitcairn Islands modified versions of sections 61, 75 and 76(4) of the Act, but the modifications were defective as they referred to provisions of the Civil Aviation Act 1949 which had never been extended to those territories. Article 5 revokes the Civil Aviation Act 1982 (Anguilla) Order 2019 (S.I. 2019/756), which is replaced by this Order. A full impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no, or no significant, impact on the private or voluntary sector is foreseen.

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 0.96.

Basis
the provision says a person is “guilty of an offence”
Confidence
0.96 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