Originally Posted by
Paragraph377
Has anybody had a read of Perth airports Terms of Condition or Terms of Reference? There would normally be a legal clause written into the Document, basically advising tenants and users that if you fail to pay us we will seize your assets - planes, GSE, office infrastructure etc. The Tenant, in this case VA, should have at some stage received a copy of the TOR and signed in agreement. Now if the Perth TOR says ‘we will take a lien against your shiny toys if you go tits up’ and VA signed off on that, then the airport have a legal right to do what they have done. But if VA didn’t sign off on the document or if there was nothing in the document that refers to placing a lien on aircraft in the event of unpaid bills then Perth airport has possibly broken the law. It becomes a very complex matter and I’m not a qualified Solicitor so who knows exactly what is in the fine print..............................................
I'm not a lawyer either, but with regards any T&C if those A/C are leased VA does not own them, and I'm reasonably certain VA cannot commit those leased A/C in any way, just as they could not use them as collateral for any finance as they are not the owner. A lease is just a fancy word for RENT, you don't have any right over a rented car or any rented property other than that permitted by law. That's the point I was making about Compass 1 or 2, the gov had passed legislation.
STOP PRESS:
Here we go:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airser...nal_LtdBetween December 1990 and December 1991 Compass Airlines Pty Ltd ("Compass") carried on business as an Australian domestic airline. The business subsequently failed, and in December 1991 Compass went into
provisional liquidation. The aircraft operated by Compass were leased from Canadian Airlines International Ltd.
At the relevant time, the
Civil Aviation Act 1988 contained provisions relating to the imposition of charges for services and facilities provided to airline operators. The legislation also created a statutory lien over aircraft to secure payment of such charges. At the time Compass went into provisional liquidation, it owed the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA, later "Airservices Australia") substantial amounts in respect of charges and penalties payable in respect of the operations of each of the leased aircraft. The CAA invoked its statutory liens. Each respondent paid, under protest, the charges and penalties claimed to be owing in respect of each aircraft. Upon receipt of those payments, the CAA discharged the liens it asserted. The amounts were paid pursuant to agreements which entitled the respondents to recover the moneys, together with interest, if it were to be held that, as against the respondents, the liens did not validly secure payment of the charges, or for any reason the liens, or the charges, or both, were, in whole or in part, illegal, void or unenforceable.
In the
Federal Court Canadian Airlines successfully contended that the charges contravened section 67 of the Act, in that they amounted to taxation.
Airservices Australia subsequently appealed the decision.
Decision[edit]
The High Court held there was no discernible relationship between Airservices Australia and the services received by Canadian Airlines. The method of calculation meant the amount paid by Canadian Airlines was not in proportion to their use of the services. Expert testimony said that the method of calculation to establish the payments owed was the best possible allocation. As a consequence the court decided it was a fee and not a tax.
The court held that there has to be a discernible relationship between the fee paid and the service provided, though they relaxed the requirement somewhat because the fee paid by Canadian Airlines was not in proportion to their use of services. There was however, a bona fide attempt to recover the costs, and it was the only way to spread the cost among the spectrum of airlines and users. Ultimately there is no need for actual correlation between services used and the charge imposed.
There has been no agreement between the A/C owner and Perth Airport, I doubt this nothing but a cat & mouse game.