Every now and again this thread appears and raises the issue of "normal aviation practice". The only reference to the latter in the ANO is with respect to one of the exemptions to Rule 5, which is for aircraft "landing and taking off" in accordance with normal aviation practice.
In the case of a PFL, the aircraft is deemed "not to be taking off" because the power has been deliberately reduced, and there is no intention of landing either; therefore it is outside the Rule 5 exemption.
The issue is not whether a PFL is or is not normal aviation practice, its whether it could reasonably be considered to be a "landing" or a "take-off" because that is what the exemption is for.
There is ample space to conduct PFL and EFATO training that avoids persons vehicles vessels etc by 500 ft, and still allows the aircraft to be flown sufficiently close the ground to determine the outcome. It may not be at the end of the runway, but does that really matter?
Rule 5 has been around for a long time, it is not affected by the JAA in any way. PFL and EFATO training are essential, they are syllabus items for the PPL and CPL and are tested in every SE prof check or skill test. They can be conducted without fear of prosecution however, it is the pilots responsibility to avoid the specified objects by 500 ft; that is not unreasonable.