From a practical perspective, I think it is unlikely one can rent an aircraft (as a non-pilot) and have the commercial pilot who you pay to fly it so far removed from the rental transaction that you don't risk the regulator viewing them as a linked transaction of plane + pilot (which would be public transport and require an AOC).
Above, I am assuming 'rent' means hire from an operator for a one off trip on an hourly basis, rather than hire for 1000 hours over 2 years (i.e. a proper dry lease where you become the operator). In the former case, the operator will probably only rent to the pilot (thus bundling the pilot and aircraft when the non-pilot pays the pilot and the pilot's cost of the aircraft); in the later case, it would be common to lease an aircraft to a person/company (who will become the operator) who will then obtain commercial pilots to fly the aircraft (i.e. a normal corporate jet operation )
However, the ANO and EASA rules both seem clear that it is perfectly legitimate for someone to acquire an aircraft's use and then pay a commercial pilot to fly the plane for them.
Equally, with the revised EASE rules quoted in IN-2015/029, a private pilot flying 5 or fewer friends and having them pay the direct operating costs (which includes the hire of the aircraft) is clearly allowed. The fact that it is also clearly defined the shares are not required to be equal, to me, would allow one or more shares to be 0. If they felt some minimum share was required by each person (or only applied to the pilot) then they would have written the law in that way.
Last edited by mm_flynn; 13th April 2015 at 15:18.
Reason: clarified