PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Statement Of Expectations 13-1-2022
View Single Post
Old 12th May 2022, 07:01
  #31 (permalink)  
Clinton McKenzie
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Canberra ACT Australia
Posts: 522
Received 85 Likes on 48 Posts
triadic said:
You would think that the phrase about strict liability could be covered off in some over riding introduction(?) and not take up space multiple times thru the body of the document.
The notes at least should all be removed.

Drafting Direction No. 3.5 of the Office of Parliamentary Counsel says, with my underlining:

Notes about strict and absolute liability

17 Previously it has been common to include notes under strict liability offences and absolute liability offences referring to section 6.1 of the Criminal Code. For example:

Note: For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code.

18 These notes must not be included in new offence provisions and should, wherever practicable, be removed from existing offence provisions.
One wonders how long it will take before the drafting brains trust finally also concedes that it’s not legally necessary to put a penalty at the foot of each and every offence provision that has the same penalty.

AOTW said:
That's where a big part of the problem lies - every lawmaker knows about speed limits and road rules, but very few of them would have a clue about the ramifications of various parts of CASRs.
More should do their job and get a clue. Much damage is done behind the smokescreen created by the ‘mystique of aviation’.

Last edited by Clinton McKenzie; 12th May 2022 at 07:12.
Clinton McKenzie is offline