An Interesting Scenario For Afficionados Of The Rules
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 847
Likes: 372
From: Canberra ACT Australia
I should have remembered: It’s still regulation by exemption
I recall being told that the ‘new’ but now decades-old and yet-to-be completed 1998 rules were going to be so simple and outcomes-based that there would be no need for exemptions. Yet eighteen page CASA EX68/24 is one of numerous band-aides, to which more band-aides have had to be applied, to cover flaws in the complex, convoluted, never-to-be-completed self-licking regulatory ice cream that was marketed as “Safety Through Simplicity”.
This paragraph at the start of CASA EX68/24 says it all for me:
In order to try to get your head around the requirements potentially applicable to your operation you now have to know and understand the Act, the 1998 regulations, the 1988 regulations and the various MOSs and exemptions and directions and….
The definition of private operation in the 1998 regs has an eight-item list of operations that a private operation is not, and the first on the list is: “an operation that is required to be conducted under the authority of an AOC under Part 119, 129 or 131 or regulation 206 of CAR”. Regulation 206 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 is of course our old friend that was the source of so many problems that were supposed to be solved by the ‘new’ rules. But there CAR 206 remains, in the year 2025.
The classification of operations structure is now more complicated and convoluted than the regulatory structure whose complexity supposedly justified the ‘new’ structure. The assertion that there is now a ‘one stop shop’ for the applicable requirements, in the form of a MOS or plain English guide or anything else, is undiluted bull!!!!!.
Welcome to the classification: Exempted Transport Operation:
Simple isn’t it? (Provided you read and apply the applicable MOS requirements, mutatis mutandis.)
Let’s focus on the paragraph that most closely resembles the flight the subject of this thread: 7AA(1)(c)
(As an aside I note the drafting stuff up in the duplication of the last two subparagraph numbers: "(iv)")
At least CASA finally realised the implications of the fact that an owner of an aircraft can be different from the registered operator. That difference should have been carried over from the 1988 regs into the exclusions from the definition of ‘passenger transport operation’ in the 1998 regs. Now it all depends on an instrument of exemption which can be repealed at any time by CASA.
Could the winners of the public raffle of the seats on Ms Ley’s flight be described as “directly associated with” her? I would have thought that the flight could well be the first occasion on which Ms Ley met/meets the winners and Ms Ley would disassociate herself from some of the opinions of the winners. If they are not “directly associated with” her, that criterion of paragraph (c) is not satisfied in the case of the flight the subject of this thread.
In any event, it appears that there can only be one passenger in addition to the owner, in order for the operation to fall within the scope of paragraph 7AA(1)(c). It may even be that there can only be one passenger: the owner of the aircraft or a passenger “directly associated with” the owner.
The provisions are at pains to make clear that the word “pilot”, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable, but does not make the same statement about the word “passenger”, in the singular. Note that, in contrast to paragraph 7AA(1)(c), paragraph 7AA(1)(a) uses the word “passengers” plural. If the correct interpretation is that, at most, there can be only one passenger in addition to the owner as pilot, or that if the owner is carried as passenger there cannot be any more passengers on board, that criterion of paragraph (c) is not satisfied in the case of the flight the subject of this thread. (I’ll write to CASA and ask for its interpretation.)
I note that there is a definition of “reward” in and for the purposes of s 7AA of the exemption, which definition presumably encapsulates CASA’s policy on what “reward” means in the rules generally:
My underlining.
As I observed earlier, I would have thought there’s a possibility that the publicity and kudos given to a high profile politician working very hard to improve her profile and popularity might fall squarely within the scope of the term "reward" for her in that context. No mention of the word “reward” in CASA’s response to The Age, though.
Is the flight being conducted for “recreational purposes”? A kind person might characterise the flight as being conducted for charitable purposes. But is that a “recreational” purpose? Some others might – perhaps unkindly - characterise the flight as being conducted in this case for the purposes of a political stunt by – ironically – the passengers. Is that a “recreational” purpose? Assuming that, either way, it is a “recreational purpose”, the other criteria still have be satisfied in order for paragraph (c) to operate.
Finally, I also stumbled across CASA’s guidance on cost-sharing flights. It says, inaccurately, that:
The criterion about public advertising in the definition of a flight that is a “cost-sharing” flight is in passive voice:
A flight is either advertised to the general public or it is not. It makes no difference who does the advertising.
This paragraph at the start of CASA EX68/24 says it all for me:
This compilation takes into account amendments up to instrument CASA EX17/25 – Amendment of CASA EX68/24 (for CASR Part 119) – Exemption Instrument 2025. It is a compilation of CASA EX68/24 – Part 119 of CASR – Supplementary Exemptions and Directions Instrument 2024, as amended and in force on 29 March 2025.
The definition of private operation in the 1998 regs has an eight-item list of operations that a private operation is not, and the first on the list is: “an operation that is required to be conducted under the authority of an AOC under Part 119, 129 or 131 or regulation 206 of CAR”. Regulation 206 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 is of course our old friend that was the source of so many problems that were supposed to be solved by the ‘new’ rules. But there CAR 206 remains, in the year 2025.
The classification of operations structure is now more complicated and convoluted than the regulatory structure whose complexity supposedly justified the ‘new’ structure. The assertion that there is now a ‘one stop shop’ for the applicable requirements, in the form of a MOS or plain English guide or anything else, is undiluted bull!!!!!.
Welcome to the classification: Exempted Transport Operation:
7AA Certain operations not air transport — exemption
(1) In this section:
employed means employed by the operator under a contract of service, or a contract for services.
exempted transport operation means one of the following:
(a) the operation or use of an aircraft by a company, a partnership, or a sole trader (the business):
(i) for the carriage of passengers, or goods (not being goods for sale or exchange); and
(ii) where the predominant purpose of the carriage is to facilitate the conduct of the operator’s business; and
(iii) where the facilitation is merely ancillary to conducting the business; and
(iv) where no passenger gives any reward for the carriage of themselves, or otherwise shares in the costs of the carriage; and
(v) where the carriage of any passenger, or the passenger’s notional share of the costs of the carriage, is not rewarded by anyone else; and
(vi) where the aircraft is flown by a pilot who is a related pilot, or a professional pilot employed by the business to fly the aircraft; and
Note The word pilot, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable.
(vii) where the aircraft used has a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity that is not greater than 19;
(b) the operation of an aircraft directly by a government organisation (the government organisation):
(i) for the carriage of passengers, or goods (not being goods for sale or exchange); and
(ii) where the predominant purpose of the carriage is to facilitate the conduct of the government organisation’s official activities; and
(iii) where the facilitation is merely ancillary to conducting those activities; and
(iv) where no passenger gives any reward for the carriage of themselves, or otherwise shares in the costs of the carriage; and
(v) where the carriage of any passenger, or the passenger’s notional share of the costs of the carriage, is not rewarded by anyone else; and
(vi) where the aircraft is flown by a pilot who is a professional pilot employed by the government organisation to fly the aircraft; and
Note The word pilot, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable.
(vii) where the aircraft used has a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity that is not greater than 19;
(c) the operation of an aircraft for the transportation of any of the following:
(i) the owner of the aircraft (the owner);
(ii) a passenger directly associated with the owner;
provided that:
(iii) the owner is not given any reward for the transportation; and
(iv) the aircraft is flown by the owner, or by a professional pilot; and
Note The word pilot, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable.
(iv) the passenger is being transported for recreational purposes.
government organisation means any department, agency, body, entity or force of the Commonwealth government, or of a State or Territory government.
Note A company that provides flight services under contract to a government organisation is not a government organisation. If a company carries passengers or goods under contract for, or on behalf of, a government organisation, the exemption under section 7AA does not apply to such carriage.
maximum certificated passenger seating capacity has the meaning given by the CASR Dictionary.
operator means the business, the government organisation, or the owner, (as the case requires) within the meaning of exempted transport operation.
professional pilot means the holder of a commercial pilot licence, or an air transport pilot licence.
related pilot means any of the following (as applicable, within the meaning of exempted transport operation) who holds at least a private pilot licence:
(a) the aircraft owner;
(b) the sole proprietor;
(c) the business partner;
(d) the company director;
(e) the company shareholder.
reward means money, goods, services, or property, or any other benefit or advantage of any kind, or the promise of any of the foregoing.
(2) The operator is exempted from compliance with the following:
(a) for an aeroplane:
(i) Part 119 of CASR; and
(ii) Subpart 91.F of CASR;
(b) for a rotorcraft — Part 119 of CASR.
(3) The exemptions in paragraph (2)(a) are subject to the condition that the operator must comply with, and ensure that the aeroplane conforms to, the performance requirements under:
(a) regulations 121.390, 121.395 and 121.420 of CASR; and
(b) subject to subsection (4), the applicable requirements in the Part 121 Manual of Standards as made under regulations 121.395 and 121.420 of CASR (the applicable MOS requirements).
Note The applicable requirements in the Part 121 Manual of Standards as made under regulation 121.395 of CASR are in Chapter 9, Division 1A, and the applicable requirements as made under regulation 121.420 are in Chapter 9, Division 2.
(4) For paragraph (3)(b):
(a) in paragraph 9.08H(1)(a) of the Part 121 Manual of Standards, the words, “the operator’s exposition”, are to be taken to say, “the operator and pilot in command”; and
(b) in subsection 9.08K(2) of the Part 121 Manual of Standards, the words, “the operator’s exposition states procedures requiring the pilot in command to have a plan”, are to be taken to say “the pilot in command has a plan”; and
(c) in subsection 9.08K(3) of the Part 121 Manual of Standards, the words, “The procedures” are to be taken to say, “The plan”; and
(d) in paragraph 9.12(2)(c) of the Part 121 Manual of Standards, the words, “using procedures specified in the operator’s exposition”, are to be taken to say, “determined by the operator and the pilot in command”; and
(e) all of the applicable MOS requirements must be read and applied, mutatis mutandis, to harmonise with the requirements and intent of this section.
[Nine more exemptions follow]
(1) In this section:
employed means employed by the operator under a contract of service, or a contract for services.
exempted transport operation means one of the following:
(a) the operation or use of an aircraft by a company, a partnership, or a sole trader (the business):
(i) for the carriage of passengers, or goods (not being goods for sale or exchange); and
(ii) where the predominant purpose of the carriage is to facilitate the conduct of the operator’s business; and
(iii) where the facilitation is merely ancillary to conducting the business; and
(iv) where no passenger gives any reward for the carriage of themselves, or otherwise shares in the costs of the carriage; and
(v) where the carriage of any passenger, or the passenger’s notional share of the costs of the carriage, is not rewarded by anyone else; and
(vi) where the aircraft is flown by a pilot who is a related pilot, or a professional pilot employed by the business to fly the aircraft; and
Note The word pilot, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable.
(vii) where the aircraft used has a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity that is not greater than 19;
(b) the operation of an aircraft directly by a government organisation (the government organisation):
(i) for the carriage of passengers, or goods (not being goods for sale or exchange); and
(ii) where the predominant purpose of the carriage is to facilitate the conduct of the government organisation’s official activities; and
(iii) where the facilitation is merely ancillary to conducting those activities; and
(iv) where no passenger gives any reward for the carriage of themselves, or otherwise shares in the costs of the carriage; and
(v) where the carriage of any passenger, or the passenger’s notional share of the costs of the carriage, is not rewarded by anyone else; and
(vi) where the aircraft is flown by a pilot who is a professional pilot employed by the government organisation to fly the aircraft; and
Note The word pilot, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable.
(vii) where the aircraft used has a maximum certificated passenger seating capacity that is not greater than 19;
(c) the operation of an aircraft for the transportation of any of the following:
(i) the owner of the aircraft (the owner);
(ii) a passenger directly associated with the owner;
provided that:
(iii) the owner is not given any reward for the transportation; and
(iv) the aircraft is flown by the owner, or by a professional pilot; and
Note The word pilot, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable.
(iv) the passenger is being transported for recreational purposes.
government organisation means any department, agency, body, entity or force of the Commonwealth government, or of a State or Territory government.
Note A company that provides flight services under contract to a government organisation is not a government organisation. If a company carries passengers or goods under contract for, or on behalf of, a government organisation, the exemption under section 7AA does not apply to such carriage.
maximum certificated passenger seating capacity has the meaning given by the CASR Dictionary.
operator means the business, the government organisation, or the owner, (as the case requires) within the meaning of exempted transport operation.
professional pilot means the holder of a commercial pilot licence, or an air transport pilot licence.
related pilot means any of the following (as applicable, within the meaning of exempted transport operation) who holds at least a private pilot licence:
(a) the aircraft owner;
(b) the sole proprietor;
(c) the business partner;
(d) the company director;
(e) the company shareholder.
reward means money, goods, services, or property, or any other benefit or advantage of any kind, or the promise of any of the foregoing.
(2) The operator is exempted from compliance with the following:
(a) for an aeroplane:
(i) Part 119 of CASR; and
(ii) Subpart 91.F of CASR;
(b) for a rotorcraft — Part 119 of CASR.
(3) The exemptions in paragraph (2)(a) are subject to the condition that the operator must comply with, and ensure that the aeroplane conforms to, the performance requirements under:
(a) regulations 121.390, 121.395 and 121.420 of CASR; and
(b) subject to subsection (4), the applicable requirements in the Part 121 Manual of Standards as made under regulations 121.395 and 121.420 of CASR (the applicable MOS requirements).
Note The applicable requirements in the Part 121 Manual of Standards as made under regulation 121.395 of CASR are in Chapter 9, Division 1A, and the applicable requirements as made under regulation 121.420 are in Chapter 9, Division 2.
(4) For paragraph (3)(b):
(a) in paragraph 9.08H(1)(a) of the Part 121 Manual of Standards, the words, “the operator’s exposition”, are to be taken to say, “the operator and pilot in command”; and
(b) in subsection 9.08K(2) of the Part 121 Manual of Standards, the words, “the operator’s exposition states procedures requiring the pilot in command to have a plan”, are to be taken to say “the pilot in command has a plan”; and
(c) in subsection 9.08K(3) of the Part 121 Manual of Standards, the words, “The procedures” are to be taken to say, “The plan”; and
(d) in paragraph 9.12(2)(c) of the Part 121 Manual of Standards, the words, “using procedures specified in the operator’s exposition”, are to be taken to say, “determined by the operator and the pilot in command”; and
(e) all of the applicable MOS requirements must be read and applied, mutatis mutandis, to harmonise with the requirements and intent of this section.
[Nine more exemptions follow]
Let’s focus on the paragraph that most closely resembles the flight the subject of this thread: 7AA(1)(c)
(c) the operation of an aircraft for the transportation of any of the following:
(i) the owner of the aircraft (the owner);
(ii) a passenger directly associated with the owner;
provided that:
(iii) the owner is not given any reward for the transportation; and
(iv) the aircraft is flown by the owner, or by a professional pilot; and
Note The word pilot, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable.
(iv) the passenger is being transported for recreational purposes.
(i) the owner of the aircraft (the owner);
(ii) a passenger directly associated with the owner;
provided that:
(iii) the owner is not given any reward for the transportation; and
(iv) the aircraft is flown by the owner, or by a professional pilot; and
Note The word pilot, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable.
(iv) the passenger is being transported for recreational purposes.
At least CASA finally realised the implications of the fact that an owner of an aircraft can be different from the registered operator. That difference should have been carried over from the 1988 regs into the exclusions from the definition of ‘passenger transport operation’ in the 1998 regs. Now it all depends on an instrument of exemption which can be repealed at any time by CASA.
Could the winners of the public raffle of the seats on Ms Ley’s flight be described as “directly associated with” her? I would have thought that the flight could well be the first occasion on which Ms Ley met/meets the winners and Ms Ley would disassociate herself from some of the opinions of the winners. If they are not “directly associated with” her, that criterion of paragraph (c) is not satisfied in the case of the flight the subject of this thread.
In any event, it appears that there can only be one passenger in addition to the owner, in order for the operation to fall within the scope of paragraph 7AA(1)(c). It may even be that there can only be one passenger: the owner of the aircraft or a passenger “directly associated with” the owner.
The provisions are at pains to make clear that the word “pilot”, in the singular, includes pilots, plural, if applicable, but does not make the same statement about the word “passenger”, in the singular. Note that, in contrast to paragraph 7AA(1)(c), paragraph 7AA(1)(a) uses the word “passengers” plural. If the correct interpretation is that, at most, there can be only one passenger in addition to the owner as pilot, or that if the owner is carried as passenger there cannot be any more passengers on board, that criterion of paragraph (c) is not satisfied in the case of the flight the subject of this thread. (I’ll write to CASA and ask for its interpretation.)
I note that there is a definition of “reward” in and for the purposes of s 7AA of the exemption, which definition presumably encapsulates CASA’s policy on what “reward” means in the rules generally:
reward means money, goods, services, or property, or any other benefit or advantage of any kind, or the promise of any of the foregoing.
As I observed earlier, I would have thought there’s a possibility that the publicity and kudos given to a high profile politician working very hard to improve her profile and popularity might fall squarely within the scope of the term "reward" for her in that context. No mention of the word “reward” in CASA’s response to The Age, though.
Is the flight being conducted for “recreational purposes”? A kind person might characterise the flight as being conducted for charitable purposes. But is that a “recreational” purpose? Some others might – perhaps unkindly - characterise the flight as being conducted in this case for the purposes of a political stunt by – ironically – the passengers. Is that a “recreational” purpose? Assuming that, either way, it is a “recreational purpose”, the other criteria still have be satisfied in order for paragraph (c) to operate.
Finally, I also stumbled across CASA’s guidance on cost-sharing flights. It says, inaccurately, that:
One of the conditions of a cost sharing flight is that you must not advertise the flight to the public.
[T]he flight is not advertised to the general public.
