Fission, your example doesn't help unless you provide details of the classification of the operation in which the aircraft was proposed to be used, the rules (VFR v IFR) under which the aircraft was proposed to be operated, etc, etc down the list of nine items I stated above.
This is the problem writ large. A statement is made by a CASA AWI in the context of a specific aircraft in specific operational circumstances, and it's extrapolated to be the blanket rule for all aircraft in all operational circumstances. FFS.
I think you're being a little disingenuous, SDT. Your 'roo example was in the context of your 'snag sheet' argument. As a matter objective technical and regulatory fact, the damage must be recorded in the MR/approved equivalent, and it's not the pilot's call on whether the aircraft is airworthy. And you're not the only person posting on this thread, and you're not the only person who used that as an example too.