PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Giving Up.
Thread: Giving Up.
View Single Post
Old 14th Apr 2019, 23:45
  #38 (permalink)  
LeadSled
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,955
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by CBR205
Nobody says CASA is perfect. I doubt many or any would argue certain aspects do need change.

Linking the organisation to the World War 2 treatment of Jews by the Germans however is just disgusting.
CBR206,
But hardly new, fifty years ago, an alternative name for the DCA (or parts of it -- the mindless enforcers) was the AIRSTAPO. As were the references to "Little Hitlers".

As for "strict liability", the use of strict liability is not the "problem", it is the CASA gross misuse of strict liability classifications of offenses in legislation, that is the issue.

If you take the trouble to look at the legislative guidelines, and the basic principles of criminal liability, it is fundamental that "strict liability" cannot be used (or should not be used) where there is any element of such as operational decision making.

Put more correctly, if mens rea is involved.

Strict liability should only be the classification of an offense where the "facts" are black and white --- do you have a license for you dog, did you park in a No Parking zone ---- Actus rea --- the physical elements of the offense need only to be proven.

One of the legislative guidelines states that "administrative convenience" should never be a reason for a "strict liability" classification.

Nothing that involves the typical decision making of day to day flying should be a strict liability offense ---- but in the CASA regulations it clearly is. If you look at the FAA Part 91 provision, it makes it clear that the pilot in command can violate any number of regulations, if necessary to save the aircraft, Australian aviation regulations makes no such provision.

Tootle pip!!
FAR §91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.
(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

PS: There is a NSW Appeal Court decision that is powerful re. authority of the PIC in an emergency, but few know about it and CASA ignores it --- look up Austlii or similar for Markey.

Last edited by LeadSled; 14th Apr 2019 at 23:56.
LeadSled is offline