Wyler - Obviously you play this one as you see fit but I'll suggest that this will generate a local wrap over the knuckles, if that hasn't already been done. And that will achieve little. Your reply will be something like, "We take matters like this very seriously and have already put measures in place to prevent re-occurrence. Thank for for flying..." But more importantly, I wouldn't hold my breath for changes at the outstation, which is where the problem originated. That requires considerably more effort and a few delayed flights to get the message that drunk passengers will not be accepted. My own airline's figures are that we have a dozen or so incidents like this every year whilst in the same period operating 100,000 flights. The problem with obnoxious people is that airports want to get rid of them and that means putting them on the first flight out!
The CAA's opinion regarding disruptive behaviour is
here. And these are the guys who may put the boot in.
Laarbruch - you are absolutely correct about the title of DfT. My point was that they have little to do with an aircraft outside UK airspace. Inside UK airspace, they are more concerned with those on the ground - at the expense of those in the air! They also cannot control boarding outside the UK - that is in local hands and subject to local law. They might be able to stipulate what is acceptable when on board a UK registered aircraft. But being realistic, that is more to do with the carrier, the cabin crew and their agent. Furthermore, they appear to have done little to deter threats to air navigation. Over the years they have basically copied the US, placed ridiculous constraints on the travelling public and airline employees and totally ignored the real security of aircraft and those on board. For example, not once in all the time I have been flying have they ever implemented a control for our safety. You read about the threat in the "red tops", have a report on the TV and then get an ill-considered knee-jerk reaction for the DfT. And given that they have several hundred (or is is thousand) employees, I also don't consider that represents good value for money. They can do much better than that!
In flight, the ANO (plus Tokyo Convention in this case) then takes precedence, which is again subject to the laws of the country being overflown. Again, not the DfT.
PM