Offence: operating a drone so as to disrupt an enhanced security special event (Public Order Act s 32(2))

In plain language

It is an offence to operate an unmanned aircraft, whether inside or outside the special event area, in a way that disrupts, interferes with, delays or obstructs an enhanced security special event or an associated activity, or that interferes with others' reasonable enjoyment of it. Penalty: fine up to $20,000, imprisonment up to 12 months, or both. The prosecution need not prove intent; it is a defence to prove on a balance of probabilities that the flight was not due to any want of reasonable care. This applies only to events declared enhanced security special events; it is not a general rule about flying over people.

Requirement as structured

It is an offence to operate an unmanned aircraft, whether inside or outside the special event area, in a way that disrupts, interferes with, delays or obstructs an enhanced security special event or an associated activity, or that interferes with others' reasonable enjoyment of it. Penalty: fine up to $20,000, imprisonment up to 12 months, or both. The prosecution need not prove intent; it is a defence to prove on a balance of probabilities that the flight was not due to any want of reasonable care. This applies only to events declared enhanced security special events; it is not a general rule about flying over people.

Original regulatory text

(2) If a person (whether in or outside a special event area of an enhanced security special event) operates an unmanned aircraft in a manner — ( a) that disrupts, interferes with, delays or obstructs the conduct of an enhanced security special event, or any activity associated with the enhanced security special event; or ( b) that interferes with the reasonable enjoyment of an enhanced security special event, or an activity associated with the enhanced security special event, the person shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both. \[16/2015; 23/2017\] (3) In proceedings for an offence under subsection (2) — ( a) it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that an accused intentionally caused the unmanned aircraft to fly in a manner as described in subsection (2)( a) or ( b); but ( b) it is a defence to the charge for the accused to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the flight was not due to any want of reasonable care on the part of the accused. \[16/2015\]

Applies when

scope

enhanced security special events only