Well this seems to have got the juices flowing. For those who haven't stopped to have a think about CAR178 - now is the time.
(b) during arrival or departure, if the aircraft is being flown:
(i) at a safe height above the terrain; and
(ii) in accordance with any instructions published in AIP;
This is one of the few regs that puts the onus on you to specifically comply with the AIP. Remember that the AIP is not regulation but CAR178 takes the fun out of the bush laywer stuff we all apparently love!!!
BOTTOM LINE (regardless of the colourful interpretations).... If you mess about near the ground and have an incident you better hope you can show where in the AIP the exact instructions are for the maneuver you were doing. "The AIP didn't say I couldn't do it" or "this is the way I interpret it" is not going to be a great defense to CAR178 in my opinion. I'd say this reg exists to remove interpretation and force you to follow specific instructions. Also note it is a 'strict liability' offence so be very careful you know exactly what you are doing.
For the sake of 15 minutes and a bit of embarrasment, completing the first procedure and commencing another is a good way to go for so many reasons. A company with good 'Just Culture' policies will support you all the way. Is that a good topic to return to a discussion about Tiger? (I don't know anything about them so don't expect any further comment about it from me)