View Single Post
Old 28th Feb 2019, 15:04
  #34 (permalink)  
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London
Posts: 495
The operator bearing the cost of the operation is not a sufficient defence.

Administrator v. Wallace, NTSB Order No. EA-5461 (2009):

In Administrator v. Clair Aero, Inc., NTSB
Order No. EA-5181 at 11 (2005), we stated that, “intangible
benefits, such as the expectation of future economic benefit or
business, are sufficient to render a flight one ‘for
compensation or hire.’” In Clair Aero, we cited several cases
in which we had previously recognized this interpretation,
including Administrator v. Blackburn, 4 NTSB 409 (1982), which
the Ninth Circuit subsequently affirmed. Blackburn v. NTSB, 709
F.2d 1514 (9th Cir. 1983). We also note that in Administrator
v. Wagner
, NTSB Order No. EA-4081 at 6 n.11 (1994), we stated as
It is well-established that “compensation,” which is
one of the elements of “common carriage,” need not be
monetary. Intangible rewards such as good will or the
expectation of future economic benefits——both of which
would likely have resulted from the flight if [the
respondent] had not been charged——can also constitute
selfin is offline