It might be law in EU states but we are discussing non EU states of Registry and their associated laws / ANO etc, such as FAA, Cayman, Bermuda, IOM, Aruba etc. None of these are EU states and each has its own separate legislation. The Owner / Operator putting their plane on these private registers has to adhere by law to the State of Registry, and pay all associated fees for registration, airworthiness etc.
When it is demanded that you adopt legislation from outside the State of Registry you are of course going to be extremely concerned that this is therefore going to register your insurance policy void and flight operations illegal.
Part NCC may well supersede legislation at a national level for EU countries, but definitely not for non EU countries. If it did it is a slippery slope and it won't be long before EASA try to turn on the other legislation issued from these registries (if they don't stand up to them now) EASA simply don't have any legal right especially as a non ICAO entity to do this to a non EU State of Registry.
It comes down to legal oversight of the non EU States of Registry. These states are not part of the EU, EASA is also not a member of ICAO, so in the event of accident or incident if these laws are forced on non EU aircraft registries then you are likely uninsured, as you have adopted legislation from a (non ICAO) EU body for an aircraft registered outside of Europe.
Rather like for example CASA poking their nose into these registries and trying to force you to adopt say some of Australia's ANO / legislation into your own because someone at CASA told you to do so. The moment you step outside the remit of your own non EU State of Registry and their legislation you will eventually run into legal difficulties.
Originally Posted by
Contacttower
Part-NCC and the rest of Regulation 965/2012 for EASA Air Operations is the law in all EU member states, in the same way Part-CAT is for AOC operators. It automatically superceeds and overrides all equivalent legislation at national level. The ANO in the UK will be updated in 2016 to reflect this when NCO/NCC comes into force. There isn't really any question over its legal status.
Inevitably there is a bit of confusion over practical implementation at the outset with all regulations, especially when it's being applied to operators for whom formal organisational requirements are something new. The UK CAA has put a certain amount of effort into explaining the new rules, although I don't know how effective that has been.
That all said, Part-NCC asks for requirements well over the top of current national regulations for privately operated complex aircraft, which generally already had a reasonable safety record - I'd be amazed if it does much to improve it! Classic case of a solution in search of a problem if you ask me.