Grima and Civil Aviation Safety Authority

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (the Tribunal) reviewed a decision by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to cancel Mr Grima's pilot licence. The dispute concerned whether Mr Grima was a fit and proper person to hold a pilot licence, particularly in light of his actions in relation to a multi-engine aircraft endorsement and a subsequent flight.

The Tribunal was required to determine whether Mr Grima possessed adequate flight time and training to be endorsed on a multi-engine aircraft, the veracity of his flight records, and whether his planning and judgment were appropriate for such an endorsement and for undertaking a flight carrying passengers later identified as wanted by police. Central to the Tribunal's consideration was the meaning of "fit and proper person" in the context of aviation safety, and whether Mr Grima's conduct demonstrated a lack of judgment and overconfidence.

The Tribunal found that Mr Grima's recorded flight time of 4.8 hours for his multi-engine endorsement was inadequate, especially given his limited total aeronautical experience and pilot-in-command time on single-engine aircraft. Expert evidence suggested a significantly higher level of experience, around 500 hours, was more appropriate for a flight of the nature undertaken. The Tribunal concluded that Mr Grima displayed a lack of judgment and overconfidence, and was not satisfied on a number of issues regarding his fitness and propriety to hold a licence. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside CASA's decision and substituted its own decision.