NZ Civil Aviation Act object

[dudduddud]

Hi there,

Quick question: why does the NZ Civil Aviation Act not have an object or key provisions?

I was having difficulty getting to sleep last night so I looked up the statute. Before I was completely overcome by ennui I noticed that there is no objective or 'overall aim' of the act. Anyone know why that is?

[Hobo]

If you mean the Civil Aviation Act 1990, it does have an object.

The very first words of the Act, state its object:

An Act—

(a) to establish rules of operation and divisions of responsibility within the New Zealand civil aviation system in order to promote aviation safety; and

(b) to ensure that New Zealand's obligations under international aviation agreements are implemented; and

(c) to consolidate and amend the law relating to civil aviation in New Zealand

I'm not sure what you mean by 'key provisions'. Each Section of the Act provides for something, or it would not be included, so, to that extent, each section is a key provision.

[Cactusjack]

If I can't sleep I have a Scotch, 10mg of Valium and 'knock the top off it'!
Not sure about reading the CAA regs or 'act' to fill in time, however each to their own :ok:

[LeadSled]

Dudby3
Also have a look S14 (if that is not correct, havera look a couple of clauses before or after 14) for the NZ version of "promote and foster", although it is much smarter wording than the US DoT words ever were, and, of course, in marked contrast to the CAAct 1988.
Tootle pip!!

[Hobo]

Cactusjack If you think that's boring you should see what we have in the UK.

Try S.2 of the Prescription Act 1832 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4/2-3/71) - still on the statute book:

No claim which may be lawfully made at the common law, by custom, prescription, or grant, to any way or other easement,or to any watercourse, or the use of any water, to be enjoyed or derived upon, over, or from any land or water of our said lord the King, or being parcel of the duchy of Lancaster or of the duchy of Cornwall, or being the property of any ecclesiastical or lay person, or body corporate, when such way or other matter as herein last before mentioned shall have been actually enjoyed by any person claiming right thereto without interruption for the full period of twenty years, shall be defeated or destroyed by showing only that such way or other matter was first enjoyed at any time prior to such period of twenty years, but nevertheless such claim may be defeated in any other way by which the same is now liable to be defeated; and where such way or other matter as herein last before mentioned shall have been so enjoyed as aforesaid for the full period of forty years, the right thereto shall be deemed absolute and indefeasible, unless it shall appear that the same was enjoyed by some consent or agreement expressly given or made for that purpose by deed or writing.

[rutan around]

Hobo
Quite obviously the Prescription act of 1832 was written by Charles Dickens during the period when he was paid per word he wrote. Any resemblance to the English language is purely coincidental and no attempt should be made to glean any meaning from this jumble of good little earners.

[Hobo]

rutan around

Yet the courts still refer to this act on a regular basis, most recently in a judgement handed down last Wednesday. It is one of the pillars of our free, open and democratic society. Parliament, ie we, have declined to alter its terms for nearly 200 years.

[rutan around]

So it continues to be a good little earner-- Now it's the Barristers arguing about what it means for $10,000 per day.

[T28D]

Try S.2 of the Prescription Act 1832 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Will4/2-3/71) - still on the statute book:

As it is in every county that is captive to the Westminster System of Government in some form or another.

[Hobo]

T28D Quite, and it astonishes me that Oz and Unzud still are.

Don't get me wrong - my sister is JAFA and my wife is from Brizza. I have driven extensively on both islands of NZ, and visited Oz from the Uk around 45 times. I've probably seen more of Oz than most Aussies - I've driven right round the edge and up and across the middle. I love it all, but I cannot understand for the life of me why you aren't a republic - however the referendum is rigged.

[ozaggie]

Read the whole thread, the only comment which made any sense was CactusJack's.
BTW, we dont need the enormous disruption and cost to change to a Republic. We have a particularly nasty import from Wales called variously 'the Ranga', 'Juliar' or the 'Red Queen', doing a perfectly good job of f&@king the place without any more distractions.

Now, where was I? Oh thats right, the Prescription act 1832. Riveting stuff!!:}

[27/09]

I've driven right round the edge and up and across the middle. I love it all, but I cannot understand for the life of me why you aren't a republic - however the referendum is rigged.

We get calls this side of the Tasman as well, to become a republic (or worse still :E a state of OZ). All we end up with is a different version of the same crap we have now. So far as I'm concerned the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know.

[my oleo is extended]

If you really want boring, something worse than watching paint dry, worse than watching an old Pensioner plucking the 'dags' off her Maltese dogs botty, try reading the below folly:

Law and sorcery in Papua New Guinea : a reconsideration of the relationship between law and custom
Author: Jonathan Aleck
Dissertation:Thesis (Ph. D.)--Australian National University, 1996.

Law and Sorcery in Papua New Guinea: A Reconsideration of the Relationship ... - Jonathan Aleck - Google Books (http://books.google.com.au/books/about/Law_and_Sorcery_in_Papua_New_Guinea.html?id=9OadNwAACAAJ&redir_esc=y)

Be warned. This material is mind numbingly boring and will have you cutting your wrists in no time.......

[dudduddud]

How about that. I was expecting to find it in the table of content but they hid it down the bottom.

I am glad that the thread didn't degenerate into a debate over the 'purpose' of the Civil Aviation Authority.

Some other things you might be interested in; may or may not be related to the aforementioned agency, or the industry in general:

Lunatics Act 1882 (http://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/hist_act/la188246v1882n34189/)

Crimes Act 1961, ss98 and 98AA Slave dealing (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM328578.html)

Crimes Act 1961, s123 Blasphemous libel (http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1961/0043/latest/DLM329036.html)

Atomic Energy Act 1945 s13 which allows high schools to conduct experiments and research on nuclear material, in a country where nuclear material is banned

And just so that we're clear on New Zealand's stance on nuclear weapons:

Nuclear-Test-Ban Act 1999

Part 2
Prohibitions and offences

5 Nuclear explosions prohibited

(1) No person may—
(a) carry out any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion; or
(b) cause, encourage, or in any way participate in, the carrying out of any nuclear weapon test explosion or any other nuclear explosion.

(2) Every person who engages in conduct prohibited by subsection (1) commits an offence.

(3) Every person who commits an offence against subsection (2) is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or a fine not exceeding $1,000,000.

(4) Nothing in subsections (1) to (3) limits the New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control Act 1987.

Got that? No nuclear explosions, please.

[Ex FSO GRIFFO]

OOooPPppsss....

Is this a baked beans f " rt oi feel coming on,....or are it a nooklear explosion..??

Windows open skipper??

Pleeze..??

:}

[my oleo is extended]

Dudduddud, thaw treaty obviously doesn't apply to Kim Jong Un.

[dudduddud]

Many things don't apply to that regime; reality included.

One interpretation might be that North Korea is not so much causing nuclear explosions rather precipitating foreign aid by blackmail.

[27/09]

One interpretation might be that North Korea is not so much causing nuclear explosions rather precipitating foreign aid by blackmail.

Let them eat cake I say. Then as happened in France a while back there might be a revolution that brings change for the good.