Cole and Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Case [2004] AATA 1092


Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2004] AATA 1092

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No W2000/255, 293, 294

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE  DIVISION )
Re DARREL MOWBRAY COLE

Applicant

And

CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Associate Professor S D Hotop, Deputy President
Mr E Fice, Member

Date18 October 2004

PlacePerth

Decision

The Tribunal affirms:

·     the decision of the respondent, dated 27 June 2000, to cancel the applicant’s Commercial Pilot Licence (Application No W2000/255);

·     the decision of the respondent, dated 21 July 2000, to refuse to reissue an Air Operator’s Certificate to the applicant (trading as “Kookaburra Air”) (Application No W2000/294); and

·     the decision of the respondent, dated 31 July 2000, to cancel the approval of Kookaburra Air’s appointment of the applicant as a Chief Pilot (Application No W2000/293).

...........(sgd S D Hotop)................

Deputy President

CATCHWORDS

CIVIL AVIATION – Commercial Pilot Licence – Air Operator’s Certificate – Chief Pilot Approval – flight exceeded flight and duty time limitations prescribed by Part 48 of Civil Aviation Orders – false or misleading written statements in pilot log book – failure to enter on maintenance release total time-in-service of aircraft – commencing flight when aircraft would require maintenance before completion of flight – failure properly to plan flight in relation to available information regarding weather conditions before commencing flight – failure to enter endorsement on maintenance release regarding aircraft undercarriage gear door defect – conducting instrument flying practice when not holding appropriate command aeroplane instrument rating – failure to record flights in flight and duty records – permitting person to pilot aircraft on flight when person did not have prescribed minimum flying time as pilot in command of that aircraft type – applicant contravened provisions of Civil Aviation Act and Civil Aviation Regulations – applicant failed in duty with respect to matters affecting safe navigation or operation of aircraft – applicant not a fit and proper person to hold Commercial Pilot Licence – applicant’s Commercial Pilot Licence should be cancelled – Air Operator’s Certificate not required to be reissued to applicant – approval of appointment of applicant as Chief Pilot should be cancelled – reviewable decisions affirmed.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Jurisdiction – decision to cancel approval of appointment of person as Chief Pilot a “reviewable decision”.

Civil Aviation Act 1988 (Cth) s 20AB(1), s 27, s 28, s 28BA, s 31 and s 98

Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 reg 43B, reg 47, reg 50, reg 133, reg 172, reg 206, reg 216, reg 239, reg 269 and reg 283

Civil Aviation Orders Section 40.0, Section 48.0, Section 48.1, Section 82.0 and Section 82.1

Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321

Australian National University v Burns (1982) 43 ALR 25

Evans v Friemann (1981) 35 ALR 428

Re Griffiths and Civil Aviation Authority (1994) 34 ALD 554

Re Repacholi and Civil Aviation Safety Authority (2003) 75 ALD 312

Re Seaview Lord Howe Pty Ltd and Civil Aviation Authority (1995) 38 ALD 422

Re Surf Air…

Continue reading Cole and Civil Aviation Safety Authority

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Cole and Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2004] AATA 1092
Case
[2004] AATA 1092
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Cole was an applicant before the Civil Aviation Authority Tribunal, contesting decisions made by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to cancel his Commercial Pilot Licence, to refuse to reissue his Air Operator’s Certificate, and to cancel the approval of his appointment as Chief Pilot of Kookaburra Air. CASA had made these decisions after determining that Cole had contravened various provisions of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (Cth) and Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, including exceeding flight and duty time limitations, making false or misleading written statements in his pilot log book, failing to enter maintenance details on a maintenance release, and commencing a flight when the aircraft would require maintenance before its completion. CASA also found that Cole had failed in his duty with respect to matters affecting the safe navigation or operation of an aircraft, and was not a fit and proper person to hold a Commercial Pilot Licence.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the decisions made by CASA were reviewable and, if so, whether those decisions were lawful and could be affirmed. The Tribunal considered the provisions of the Civil Aviation Act and Civil Aviation Regulations, as well as relevant case law. The Tribunal found that the decisions made by CASA were reviewable under the Civil Aviation Act, and proceeded to consider the merits of the decisions. The Tribunal found that CASA’s decisions were supported by the evidence and were lawful, and therefore affirmed the decisions.

The Tribunal affirmed the decision of CASA to cancel Cole’s Commercial Pilot Licence, to refuse to reissue his Air Operator’s Certificate, and to cancel the approval of his appointment as Chief Pilot of Kookaburra Air. The Tribunal found that CASA had correctly applied the relevant provisions of the Civil Aviation Act and Civil Aviation Regulations in making these decisions, and that the decisions were supported by the evidence. The Tribunal also found that the decisions were not unreasonable, and therefore could be affirmed.

Orders

Orders of the court

The Tribunal affirms:

· the decision of the respondent, dated 27 June 2000, to cancel the applicant’s Commercial Pilot Licence (Application No W2000/255);

· the decision of the respondent, dated 21 July 2000, to refuse to reissue an Air Operator’s Certificate to the applicant (trading as “Kookaburra Air”) (Application No W2000/294); and

· the decision of the respondent, dated 31 July 2000, to cancel the approval of Kookaburra Air’s appointment of the applicant as a Chief Pilot (Application No W2000/293).

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.