UA - Read from this:
8 First, Brad Cowan, an airworthiness inspector employed by CASA, with what appeared to be significant expertise, stated that CASA officers had conducted an audit of Barrier Aviation from 29 October 2012 to 12 November 2012 in which they identified a number of instances of non-compliance with the Act. Secondly, CASA relied on the affidavit of Craig Richardson, a pilot who, the parties agreed, was currently disaffected with his former employer, Barrier Aviation.
and:
15 Mr Richardson gave evidence that early in his employment, he formed the view that an aircraft was unfit to fly after carrying out a daily pre-flight inspection. He could not recall, he said, what the issue was or the aircraft concerned, but he had refused to take that aircraft that he had been assigned to fly, because he considered it to be unserviceable, and instead flew another one. When he returned from the flight, he said he had been surprised to see that the aircraft which he refused to fly was missing, and apparently, according to his inquiries, had been flown by another pilot who had not identified the same defect.
Barrier Judgement – 2013FCA0227 | Assistance to the Aviation Industry