|
MERGED: Qantas ...was it blackmail?
|
I'm curious what the legal implications are for the manager that approved this action... Interference?
where the hell are we, Africa? |
Blackmail Kaz, really? You of all people should know better. We live in a user pays world. Private property, private agreements. This is strictly civil and not criminal, unless you believe that parking a car behind an aircraft constitutes false imprisonment of the passengers. |
I would have thought the legal term would be extortion, rather than blackmail, but either way when I read this I thought ... WTF???
I know that Canberra has a dreadful reputation for GA but I never thought I'd see the day when Pyongyang seemed the more reasonable of the two |
Qantas, do us all a favour, just reduce services to Canberra to zero. |
Squawks, blackmail is demanding money with menace, and interfering with an aircraft is a criminal offence. My hypothetical question concerning the second limb is whether parking a motor vehicle in close proximity to the rear of an aircraft loaded with fuel and passengers and intending to impede its movement constitutes “interference”. I think it’s an interesting question, but what would I know? false imprisonment,...hardly. Detinue perhaps? |
Sunfish? Have t heard from you for ages! Hope all is well, by the way would you prefer Tiger to take over from QF, or maybe get rid of Cobham, they are the disaster stories regarding reliability. |
Private property, private agreements |
This was the interesting bit.
It was only after senior Qantas management became involved that the car was moved and the aircraft, which was flying from Auckland to Sydney before diverting to Canberra because of bad weather, could take off. |
Would have been an interesting situation if the delay by the airport caused the flight to miss curfew or crew out of hours.
There is a response in the original article suggesting that if the crew just went and got a pushback clearance then the airport car by law would have has to move as he is now obstructing a aircraft which has a clearance on a taxiway. Without any legal documentation holding the aircraft in CBR I cannot see how the airport could stand in the way of departure especially if the captain called for the Federal Police to move the airport car. |
What is reported to have been done is similar to the stunts pulled in days past by authorities in such salubrious places as Syria and Pakistan when Qantas aircraft made unscheduled landings. Many a hat was passed around and crew personal credit cards were maxed out to pay for fuel and airport charges. Who'd have thunk that this kind of behaviour would occur in Australia? Perhaps understandable if Qantas was a fly-buy-night outfit with a bad credit record but the action of Canberra Airport was inexcusable. - I'd back Qantas any day to pay its debts.
|
Commonwealth land isn’t it? |
Originally Posted by Angle of Attack
(Post 10147037)
Sunfish? Have t heard from you for ages! Hope all is well, by the way would you prefer Tiger to take over from QF, or maybe get rid of Cobham, they are the disaster stories regarding reliability. |
if the crew just went and got a pushback clearance then the airport car by law would have has to move as he is now obstructing a aircraft which has a clearance on a taxiway. As much as I am not a fan of the airport there is possibly another side to this. Just perhaps, Canberra Airport has being trying unsuccessfully to negotiate an agreement with QF and in their often heavy handed way QF have refused to negotiate, leaving the airport lease holder with a problem and they saw an opportunity here to apply some pressure. Before anyone else starts banging on about this being a safety issue, it is not. AS PIC if I want or need to take my jet in there I will. Then I will walk away and let my company deal with the airport baron. |
Originally Posted by kaz3g
(Post 10147014)
Squawks, blackmail is demanding money with menace, and interfering with an aircraft is a criminal offence. My hypothetical question concerning the second limb is whether parking a motor vehicle in close proximity to the rear of an aircraft loaded with fuel and passengers and intending to impede its movement constitutes “interference”. I think it’s an interesting question, but what would I know? false imprisonment,...hardly. Detinue perhaps? It simply doesn't fit the general definition of blackmail but I was saying if you're going to throw that term around, you may as well call it false imprisonment. Detinue? The crime of wrongful detention of goods or personal possessions. what is private about federal land owned by the Australian government and leased to a private company? |
Thinking that "belief .....on reasonable grounds" might be an out (if you are using the VIC Crimes Act as a start point).
But does show that the granting self government in 1988 to a Territory may have been a mistake, esp if the place make such demands to aircraft operators that divert for obviously safety reasons. Spent a little time living in the place but came away thinking it should be dissolved into NSW!!! |
. I think you will find that the law is a little more complex than that. The airport baron knew what he was doing by directing staff to block the aircraft. You assume a taxi clearance confers some legal right to remove the aircraft from the airport ramp. As much as I am not a fan of the airport there is possibly another side to this. Just perhaps, Canberra Airport has being trying unsuccessfully to negotiate an agreement with QF and in their often heavy handed way QF have refused to negotiate, leaving the airport lease holder with a problem and they saw an opportunity here to apply some pressure. Really it is not something that should be dealt at a operational level, this is commercial law stuff. |
And this story comes to light a year after it happened now?? Someone has an agenda.
|
Interesting problem, simple solution. Start engines and briefly run them up to take-off power. Problem dissapears. Easy!
|
I’m pretty sure under Australian regs you are breaking the law if you interfere with the operation of an aircraft. ie prevent it from dispatching. Maybe someone knows which regs?
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 19:20. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.