From the ANO (which I believe is
law 
)
73 A person shall not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft, or any person therein.
and
74 A person shall not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property.
Of course, it is a rather subjective assessment as to whether these laws were broken and I'm sure some highly paid suit from Holborn could whistfully make a mockery of the Regulator in the courts. However, good airmanship would dictate that pilots shouldn't stumble through an aeros box which was adequately NOTAMed.
As for the 'unfit for purpose' chestnut - so what? We all know it isn't perfect but to wheel out the same old mantra every time someone misses or doesn't even bother to check NOTAMs is not really a valid defence amongst pilots. The argument is almost as infantile as naughty school kids pointing the finger at each other.
