Someone will correct me I'm sure, however I thought ALL CASA "strict liability" offence's are CRIMINAL offence's which only need a delegate or some other bureaucrat to "be satisfied" that an offence had taken place to make it thus. Not anything like the real world definition of a criminal with "intent". Did the pilot fly the aircraft at the stated altitude with intent? Well, it doesn't really matter if the FOI was satisfied does it?
Or does it?
I guess I am in agreement that there appears to be differences in strict liability offence's depending on whose mate did it, or some other **** who doesn't pay baksheesh of any kind did, to be in the club.
Of course I'm wrong!
We don't have regulations in Australia any more, (still working on them 23 years later), but we do have....................................... "EXEMPTIONS".
So it's not really unsafe if you have an EXEMPTION, but it is if you don't.
Stone the bloody crows!