(1)A person who dishonestly receives a programme included in a broadcasting . . . service provided from a place in the United Kingdom with intent to avoid payment of any charge applicable to the reception of the programme commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale.
(2)Where an offence under this section committed by a body corporate is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body, or a person purporting to act in any such capacity, he as well as the body corporate is guilty of the offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
In relation to a body corporate whose affairs are managed by its members “director” means a member of the body corporate.
Cases considering section 297 10
[2013] EWHC 1923 (Admin) · 7 June 2013Interprets
Interprets “any charge applicable to the reception of the programme” as the charge properly applicable in the circumstances, including the commercial charge for reception at licensed premises. The provision is not confined to the provider actually used. (see paras [9]-[13])
[2013] EWHC 475 (QB) · 8 March 2013
The court held that section 297 precisely covered the alleged conduct of providing subscribers, for payment, with a means of circumventing encryption. The conduct should therefore have been prosecuted under that statutory provision or as conspiracy to commit offences under it, subject to the statutory safeguards (see paras [18]–[23]).
[2012] EWHC 529 (Admin) · 8 March 2012Limits
The court considered the summary offence and its earlier concern that an essential element could depend on the legality of a remote contractual export restriction. The unusual use of the offence supported applying civil costs principles to the private prosecution (see paras [15]–[19]).
What each judgment says about section 297 is in the case-law panel in the full Act.