Tickle and Civil Aviation Safety Authority

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Tickle against a decision by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to refuse him a class 1 medical certificate. Mr Tickle, a 63-year-old farmer and owner of an earth-moving business, wished to obtain a pilot's licence to fly his helicopter for commercial purposes, including joy flights and fire-spotting. His medical history included type 2 diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, fixed cardiac ischaemia, and ischaemic cardiomyopathy.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether Mr Tickle met the relevant medical standards for the issue of a class 1 medical certificate, and if not, whether the extent to which he failed to meet those standards was likely to endanger the safety of air navigation. The court was required to interpret the meaning of "likely" in the context of aviation safety, drawing on previous tribunal decisions.

The court found that Mr Tickle did not meet the relevant medical standards due to his pre-existing cardiac conditions and diabetes. Expert evidence from Dr Herman and Dr Clem indicated a substantial and real chance, assessed as high as 5% per annum, of Mr Tickle experiencing distracting chest pain, shortness of breath, or loss of consciousness. This risk was considered "likely" to endanger air navigation, as defined by a "substantial or real and not remote chance." The court accepted that these symptoms would make it extremely difficult to pilot an aircraft, and the risk of an acute coronary or cerebrovascular event far exceeded acceptable levels for a Class 1 Medical Certificate. The court also noted that Mr Tickle had ceased taking metoprolol, a beta-blocker that could mitigate cardiac risks, against medical advice.

Consequently, the court affirmed CASA's decision to refuse to issue Mr Tickle with a class 1 medical certificate. The court concluded that even the presence of a safety pilot would not be sufficient to reduce the assessed risk to an acceptable level.