Asma Al-Assad Cannot Return To The Uk
News2 mins ago
Is Face Coverings In Shops Compulsory
Just been into my local corner shop (with mask on) and no other customers were wearing them.
Queried it with the shop assistant who told me that the owner had decided that he was leaving it up to the customers whether to wear one or not.
Also been reported in my local rag that many big name stores are refusing to 'police' customers who dont wear a face covering.
So is this thing *law* or simply guidline's with threat of a fine?
(And how can you be fined for dismissing a 'guidline'?
Thanks.
Queried it with the shop assistant who told me that the owner had decided that he was leaving it up to the customers whether to wear one or not.
Also been reported in my local rag that many big name stores are refusing to 'police' customers who dont wear a face covering.
So is this thing *law* or simply guidline's with threat of a fine?
(And how can you be fined for dismissing a 'guidline'?
Thanks.
Answers
//I sneezed in my mask on the way home work last week. I had to sit for half an hour, on the bus, covered in my own snot and germs from work. Is this healthy?// I've just come off the phone to my cousin (today is her birthday). She is the clinical nursing manager ("Matron" in old money) in a large West Country hospital. She has spent her entire working life (>30 years)...
19:28 Sat 25th Jul 2020
//What about taxi drivers, certain delivery drivers, the police and those with a medical exemption for example?//
Please read the rest, Corby. Particularly the bit about the "Following Provisions". Those provisions provide the exceptions you mention (among others). It would be up to the defendant to convince the court that his particular circumstances were subject to one of those provisions.
Please read the rest, Corby. Particularly the bit about the "Following Provisions". Those provisions provide the exceptions you mention (among others). It would be up to the defendant to convince the court that his particular circumstances were subject to one of those provisions.
And I forgot to add that the difference between the face coverings legislation and the seat belt legislation is that in the latter all the prosecution has to prove is that no seat belt was being worn. The right to an exemption must be proved by the defendant. The former, because of the way it is worded, places the burden on the prosecution to show that no exemption was applicable. The offence is "entering (or remaining on) premises, without a reasonable excuse, with no face covering." The legislation should have been framed along the lines:
S1 - It is an offence to enter or remain on premises without a face covering.
S2 - A person shall not be guilty of an offence under S1 if he can show that he had a reasonable excuse.
Then all the prosecution has to prove is that the premises was entered with no face covering worn. It would then be up to the defendant to satisfy the court that he had a reasonable excuse.
It ain't rocket science. If the defendant chooses not to respond to any questions about being exempt that is his right. He will have no case to answer in court because the prosecution will not have proved their case. He will not have to give evidence to counter the prosecution's successful case and the warning he receives "It may harm you defence if you do not mention when questioned something you later rely on in court" will be irrelevant because he will need nothing to rely on.
S1 - It is an offence to enter or remain on premises without a face covering.
S2 - A person shall not be guilty of an offence under S1 if he can show that he had a reasonable excuse.
Then all the prosecution has to prove is that the premises was entered with no face covering worn. It would then be up to the defendant to satisfy the court that he had a reasonable excuse.
It ain't rocket science. If the defendant chooses not to respond to any questions about being exempt that is his right. He will have no case to answer in court because the prosecution will not have proved their case. He will not have to give evidence to counter the prosecution's successful case and the warning he receives "It may harm you defence if you do not mention when questioned something you later rely on in court" will be irrelevant because he will need nothing to rely on.
NJ, the Regs state, “No person may, without reasonable excuse, enter or remain within a relevant place without wearing a face covering” and later goes on to give examples of what is meant by a reasonable excuse.
How does that prevent the police taking the same approach as that in the seatbelt legislation?
If the police see someone without a face covering, is it not up to that person to show they have a reasonable excuse for not wearing the covering in the same way someone in a car has to demonstrate they fall within one of the seatbelt exemptions?
If the defendant fails to give a reasonable excuse for not wearing a face covering, how is he not "without a reasonable excuse"?
How does that prevent the police taking the same approach as that in the seatbelt legislation?
If the police see someone without a face covering, is it not up to that person to show they have a reasonable excuse for not wearing the covering in the same way someone in a car has to demonstrate they fall within one of the seatbelt exemptions?
If the defendant fails to give a reasonable excuse for not wearing a face covering, how is he not "without a reasonable excuse"?
From bbc link:
“It is not compulsory for shop workers to wear face coverings but the government said it "strongly" recommended that employers consider their use where appropriate.”
Customers must wear masks to protect shop workers. If I enter a shop masked & someone unmasked coughs near me, I will remonstrate at them - after photoing them - & seek prosecution if I suffer. Woe betide the tambos in your midst!
“It is not compulsory for shop workers to wear face coverings but the government said it "strongly" recommended that employers consider their use where appropriate.”
Customers must wear masks to protect shop workers. If I enter a shop masked & someone unmasked coughs near me, I will remonstrate at them - after photoing them - & seek prosecution if I suffer. Woe betide the tambos in your midst!
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.