Air Offences Solicitors

Berkeley Square Solicitors are leading London criminal defence lawyers, recognised for their expertise in defending air safety offence allegations.

There has been a rise in prosecutions for air safety offences, including in-flight disturbances and drone prosecutions. It is vital to get legal advice from a solicitor experienced in this area as penalties can be severe and involve more than one jurisdiction.

Defending Drone Prosecutions

While it is not illegal to fly a drone in the UK there are strict rules about their use. Almost all drone operators are familiar with these. However, many choose not to abide by them. Some think the risk of prosecution or arrest is low as so many other drone operators also breach them. This is not always true.

Since the Gatwick Airport drone incident at the end of 2018 there are signs that that the police – at the instigation of the Civil Aviation Authority - are now cracking down on drone abuse particularly in no fly zones in the big cities. It is a serious criminal offence to recklessly endanger an aircraft through drone use and anyone arrested for operating a drone should take legal advice. The offence carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment although prison sentences are reserved for the most serious cases. Nonetheless, the reputational damage following a criminal conviction even where an accused avoids prison can also be far reaching. Read our guide about drone prosecutions.

In-Flight Disturbances & Air Rage

The Courts are seeing Increasing numbers of prosecutions for the offence of Being Drunk on an Aircraft in contravention of Articles 242 and 265(7) of the Air Navigation Order 2016. This offence carries a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment. Often the worst type of cases where a passenger becomes unruly on an aircraft can also result in additional charges of assault or criminal damage or endangering a person or property on an aircraft contrary to Article 241 of the 2016 legislation which also carries a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment.

The authorities are seeking to stamp down on this type of behaviour by passing deterrent sentences – designed to set an example to warn others - of immediate custody. Prison sentences are common regardless of the good character of those charged or the fact that they may have an impeccable background and their behaviour maybe wholly out of character.

In a series of cases of the past few years the Court of Appeal has made this position clear when asked to consider applications from defendants questioning whether the custodial sentences passed on them were “manifestly excessive.” In response the appellate court has consistently upheld sentences. For example, in R v Kupendrarajah [2017] EWCA Crim 1817 the Court of Appeal reiterated that:

“This court has made clear time and again that those who become drunk on an aircraft in flight must expect an immediate custodial sentence. The experience of a drunken person in the confines of an aircraft is terrifying, not least on a long-haul flight, and poses a risk to safety. It is not unusual that such offences are committed by those of good character and with significant responsibilities to others. However, that provides no basis for avoiding the immediate custodial sentence which such offences must typically compel.”

BSQ have been involved in a number of air disturbance cases where our clients have avoided custody - see our case studies below.