Online Criminal Harms Act 2023 · s 54

Suggest a correction

Tell us what is wrong in this text. We check every suggestion against the official version before we change anything.

What is wrong?Wrong or mistyped wordsWrong structure or numberingWrong title or detailsText that appears twice

What should change, and whyUp to 2,000 characters.The text as it should read (optional)

—(1) It is not a defence to a charge for an offence under section 50, 52 or 53 that —(a)the person is subject to a duty under any written law, any rule of law, any contract or any rule of professional conduct, that prevents or restricts the person from complying with a requirement of the Part 2 direction, the Part 6 order or the written notice under section 47 or 48, as the case may be; or(b)the person has applied for a reconsideration of, or has appealed against, the Part 2 direction or the Part 6 order, as the case may be.(2) It is not a defence to a charge for an offence under section 51 that —(a)the person is subject to a duty of confidentiality or privacy imposed by any rule of law or a duty imposed by any contract or any rule of professional conduct, that prevents or restricts the person from complying with a requirement of the rectification notice, the implementation directive or the code of practice concerned, as the case may be; or(b)the person has appealed against the decision to designate the person’s online service, the decision to give a code application notice to the person, a requirement of the implementation directive or a requirement of the code of practice concerned or a variation thereof, as the case may be.(3) Without limiting the meaning of “reasonable excuse”, it is a defence to a charge for an offence under this Part (except in relation to a stop communication direction) if the accused proves, on a balance of probabilities, that —(a)it was not reasonably practicable to do more than what was in fact done to comply with the Part 2 direction, rectification notice, implementation directive or Part 6 order, as the case may be; or(b)there was no better practicable means than was in fact used.
It is not a defence to a charge for an offence under section 50, 52 or 53 that —(a)the person is subject to a duty under any written law, any rule of law, any contract or any rule of professional conduct, that prevents or restricts the person from complying with a requirement of the Part 2 direction, the Part 6 order or the written notice under section 47 or 48, as the case may be; or(b)the person has applied for a reconsideration of, or has appealed against, the Part 2 direction or the Part 6 order, as the case may be.
It is not a defence to a charge for an offence under section 51 that —(a)the person is subject to a duty of confidentiality or privacy imposed by any rule of law or a duty imposed by any contract or any rule of professional conduct, that prevents or restricts the person from complying with a requirement of the rectification notice, the implementation directive or the code of practice concerned, as the case may be; or(b)the person has appealed against the decision to designate the person’s online service, the decision to give a code application notice to the person, a requirement of the implementation directive or a requirement of the code of practice concerned or a variation thereof, as the case may be.
Without limiting the meaning of “reasonable excuse”, it is a defence to a charge for an offence under this Part (except in relation to a stop communication direction) if the accused proves, on a balance of probabilities, that —(a)it was not reasonably practicable to do more than what was in fact done to comply with the Part 2 direction, rectification notice, implementation directive or Part 6 order, as the case may be; or(b)there was no better practicable means than was in fact used.

Edit the text above. Up to 20,000 characters.Where you checked it (optional)A link to the official version, if you have one.

The text as we hold it

Open the official text

s 54Defences

(1)

It is not a defence to a charge for an offence under section 50, 52 or 53 that —

(a)

the person is subject to a duty under any written law, any rule of law, any contract or any rule of professional conduct, that prevents or restricts the person from complying with a requirement of the Part 2 direction, the Part 6 order or the written notice under section 47 or 48, as the case may be; or

(b)

the person has applied for a reconsideration of, or has appealed against, the Part 2 direction or the Part 6 order, as the case may be.

(2)

It is not a defence to a charge for an offence under section 51 that —

(a)

the person is subject to a duty of confidentiality or privacy imposed by any rule of law or a duty imposed by any contract or any rule of professional conduct, that prevents or restricts the person from complying with a requirement of the rectification notice, the implementation directive or the code of practice concerned, as the case may be; or

(b)

the person has appealed against the decision to designate the person’s online service, the decision to give a code application notice to the person, a requirement of the implementation directive or a requirement of the code of practice concerned or a variation thereof, as the case may be.

(3)

Without limiting the meaning of “reasonable excuse”, it is a defence to a charge for an offence under this Part (except in relation to a stop communication direction) if the accused proves, on a balance of probabilities, that —

(a)

it was not reasonably practicable to do more than what was in fact done to comply with the Part 2 direction, rectification notice, implementation directive or Part 6 order, as the case may be; or

(b)

there was no better practicable means than was in fact used.