Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]

Part 4, Chapter 3 deals with enforcement and Clause 83(1) lists activities where a person charged with an offence can claim a defence. Paragraph (a) brings forward a defence, when a person is charged, provided that the activity was carried out for the purpose of securing the safety of a vessel, aircraft or marine structure or for the purpose of saving life. My amendment would introduce the word "cargo" after "vessel". This would ensure that a defence for failing to comply with licensing requirements was equally available where cargo in itself became a danger or had to be destroyed or rendered innocuous. For example, this could apply in the event of cargo shifting, or a spillage or leakage when it may be necessary to jettison some or all of the cargo to avoid loss or damage to other goods. Amendment A40 inserts a new clause headed "Accidental loss overboard". It states: ""It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under section 82(1) to prove that the action in contravention of section 62(1) was the result of the accidental loss overboard of cargo."" Such a defence would arise where, for example, as a result of stress of weather or other conditions beyond the vessel’s control, cargo falls or is washed overboard. I beg to move.