Defences
23.—(1) In proceedings against a person for a contravention of regulation 9(1) which involves using a building or part of a building licensed for the manufacture of explosives, for another manufacturing process not specified in the licence, it shall be a defence for that person to prove that —
(a)that use was temporary;
(b)that other process of manufacture involved explosive of the same, or a lower, hazard type than the explosives which the conditions of the licence permit in, as the case may be, that building or part of a building;
(c)the maximum quantity of explosives in that building or part of a building at any one time permitted under the conditions of the licence was not exceeded; and
(d)he informed the Executive as soon as was reasonably practicable after the start of that use.
(2) In proceedings against a person for a contravention of regulation 10(1), it shall be a defence for that person to prove that the storage of explosives without a licence or in breach of a condition of a licence was caused by an emergency being an emergency which that person took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to avoid.
(3) In proceedings against a person for a contravention of regulation 10(1) where it is alleged against that person that the storage concerned was for a period longer than a period (“the permitted period”) referred to in regulation 10(2)(c), (d), (e) or (f)(i) or (ii), it shall be for that person to prove that the storage concerned was for no longer than the permitted period.