From this side of the world, I can only see this as a precedent for future action <img src="frown.gif" border="0"> <img src="frown.gif" border="0">
What does astound me, however, is the awarding of costs. Since when did a criminal have to pay Crown costs, even for the most heinous of crimes? Why on earth is a pilot required to pay CAA's costs, when they are effectively (ISTM) acting as a quasi Crown prosecuter.
FL, I'm sure that you can explain such that I can understand, but the ramifications must be enormous. Does this give a local council the right to bring charges against a pilot for landing without planning permission, then claim their costs if/when they win? If so, could you see this happening in a lower profile case, eg illegal tipping, or failing to comply with a local planning restriction?
The mind boggles <img src="eek.gif" border="0"> <img src="eek.gif" border="0">