61.—(1) Subject to this Part, if there is a contravention of hazardous substances control, the appropriate person shall be guilty of an offence.
(2) There is a contravention of hazardous substances control—
(a)if a quantity of a hazardous substance equal to or exceeding the controlled quantity is or has been present on, over or under land and either—
(i)there is no hazardous substances consent for the presence of the substance; or
(ii)there is hazardous substances consent for its presence but the quantity present exceeds the maximum quantity permitted by the consent;
(b)if there is or has been a failure to comply with a condition subject to which a hazardous substances consent was granted.
(3) In paragraph (1) “the appropriate person” means—
(a)in relation to a contravention falling within sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph (2)—
(i)any person knowingly causing the substance to be present on, over or under the land;
(ii)any person allowing it to be so present; and
(b)in relation to a contravention falling within sub-paragraph (a) or (b) of that paragraph, the person in control of the land.
[F1(4) A person guilty of an offence under this Article shall be liable—
(a)on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £30,000;
(b)on conviction on indictment, to a fine,
and in determining the amount of any fine to be imposed on a person convicted of an offence under this Article, the court shall in particular have regard to any financial benefit which has accrued or appears likely to accrue to him in consequence of the offence.]
(5) In any proceedings for an offence under this Article it shall be a defence for the accused to prove—
(a)that he took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to avoid commission of the offence; or
(b)that commission of the offence could be avoided only by the taking of action amounting to a breach of a statutory duty.
(6) In any proceedings for an offence consisting of a contravention falling within paragraph (2)(a), it shall be a defence for the accused to prove that at the time of the alleged commission of the offence he did not know, and had no reason to believe,—
(a)if the case falls within sub-paragraph (a)(i)—
(i)that the substance was present; or
(ii)that it was present in a quantity equal to or exceeding the controlled quantity;
(b)if the case falls within sub-paragraph (a)(ii), that the substance was present in a quantity exceeding the maximum quantity permitted by the consent.
(7) In any proceedings for an offence consisting of a contravention falling within paragraph (2)(b), it shall be a defence for the accused to prove that he did not know, and had no reason to believe, that there was a failure to comply with a condition subject to which hazardous substances consent had been granted.
Modifications etc. (not altering text)
C1Art. 61 referred to (31.12.2009) by Planning (Control of Major-Accident Hazards) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2009 (S.R. 2009/399), reg. 5(1) (with reg. 4(2)(3))