Note: Slight drift from boards, directors & IOS submissions..
From post # 297 of the Reg Reform thread..
sprocket:
If CASRs were supposed to be in plain English, why is there a dictionary as Part 1? Surely plain English words are sufficiently defined in Webster's or Oxford and one should not need to invest in Black's?
Well according to the 1072 page, 1 July 2009 version, on ‘How to use the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998’ {Note: Which as a point of interest was around 6 months after the Skull’s appointment 
}, under the heading of…
“…Definitions and meanings
30. A piece of legislation often includes definitions of terms used within it. The terms defined are principally the ones that are specific to the legislation in some way — for example because they have been specially invented. Ordinary dictionary words are not normally defined; they are assumed to take their ordinary dictionary meanings. Terms defined in the Act take the same meanings in the Regulations unless redefined in the Regulations. Legal terms also are not normally defined; again, they are assumed to have their ordinary legal meanings.
31. Naturally, the Regulations use many technical terms. A term of which the meaning is well known within aviation and generally accepted is usually not defined. If an unfamiliar word or term occurs in the Regulations, it may be defined in a general dictionary. For example, chord, empennage, fuselage, and longeron are all defined in the Macquarie Dictionary.
32. Occasionally a term that is in general use may be defined because the general meaning of the term is not sufficiently precise. For example, although everybody knows what ‘take-off’ means, it may be necessary, in a particular case, to treat taxiing as part of a take-off. It is not certain whether the ordinary meaning of ‘take-off’ includes taxiing or not. In cases like this there will be a definition in the Regulations.
33. Definitions may be either in the Dictionary at the end or in the text of the Parts.
34. A few terms that are used in the Regulations and that are not defined either in the Regulations or in standard dictionaries are discussed in the Note on Terms at the end of this Guide.
35. Although the Dictionary is not called a Part of the Regulations, and is not numbered, it is as much part of the Regulations as any of the numbered Parts.
36. If a definition that applies throughout the Regulations is in the Regulations but not in the Dictionary, there is a ‘signpost’ in the Dictionary to the regulation where the definition is. For example: major change, for a type design — see regulation 21.093.
37. The standard definitions of aviation terms are those laid down by ICAO and published by it in International Civil Aviation Vocabulary (ICAO Document 9713). Generally, terms defined by ICAO are used in the Regulations with the meaning given by ICAO. There may still be a definition in the Regulations, but the definition will usually be followed by a note to the effect that the source of the definition is the ICAO definition. (The ICAO definition will either be used unchanged, or rewritten in minor ways to be clearer and easier to read.) Often, where a term defined in the Regulations is used, there will be a note nearby saying where to look for the definition.
38. See Subpart 1.A for general provisions about interpretation and definitions.….”
Well that should clear it all up for all those muddle-minded AOC holders, gingerbeers, skygods & knuckledraggers….
We all know the tale now on how the CASR 1998 has grown from a paltry 190 pages, back in 1998-9 to (at last count) 2186 pages and that it all originally came about (the need 
) because of the desire to…
….“ 1.003 Harmonisation with FARs
(1) These regulations contain provisions based on the FARs.
(2) An object of these regulations is to harmonise certain parts of Australia’s aviation safety law with the FARs.
(3) The words ‘Source FARs’ below a regulation indicate that the regulation is based on the section of the FARs, as in force on 1 January 1997, stated after the words and, if the section number is followed by the word ‘modified’, the word indicates that the FARs section has been modified for the regulation..." {Q for WLRP: Hmm how do you think we are going with that original endeavour??
}
I’m sure the WLR panel are all over this..
..but for those of us that were contemplating suicide while studying ATPL Air leg, or trying to apply for an AOC, or just finding out whether they’re operationally legal or not 
; the HG to the CASRs put out by the OLDP should have a powerful sedative & anti-depressant effect…
Hmm wonder if there is a QRH version to simplify the task for the WLR panel..??
OK back to boreds and other areas of significant contemplation for the WLRP...