Christidis v Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2006] FCA 615

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Christidis v Civil Aviation Safety Authority [2006] FCA 615

GEORGE JOHN CHRISTIDIS v CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY

VID 554 of 2006

RYAN J

25 MAY 2006

MELBOURNE

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VID 554 of 2006

BETWEEN: GEORGE JOHN CHRISTIDIS

Applicant

AND: CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY

Respondent

JUDGE: RYAN J

DATE OF ORDER: 25 MAY 2006

WHERE MADE: MELBOURNE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The applicant's motion for interlocutory relief be refused. 2. The applicant pay the respondent's costs of and incidental to the said motion for interlocutory relief, including its costs of the hearing on 24 May 2005. 3. The directions hearing herein be adjourned to a date to be fixed. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

VICTORIA DISTRICT REGISTRY VID 554 of 2006

BETWEEN: GEORGE JOHN CHRISTIDIS

Applicant

AND: CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY

Respondent

JUDGE: RYAN J

DATE: 25 MAY 2006

PLACE: MELBOURNE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT 1 The applicant by his substantive application seeks a review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1997 (Cth) ("the AD(JR) Act") of an administrative decision said to have been made by the respondent Civil Aviation Safety Authority ("CASA") to "cancel or purport to cancel the applicant's Commercial Pilot (Helicopter) Licence ("the licence") pursuant to section 32(1) of the Trans-Tasman Mutual Recognition Act 1997 (Cth)" ("the Mutual Recognition Act"). 2 The applicant has, since February 2000, held a Commercial Pilot Licence (Helicopter) issued by CASA. In February 2001, he underwent helicopter flight training in New Zealand and, in January 2002, applied to the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority ("the NZCAA") pursuant to the Mutual Recognition Act for registration as a helicopter pilot. On 11 March 2002 the NZCAA issued him with a New Zealand Commercial Pilot's Licence (Helicopter) which bore a rubber stamp impression "Issued In Accordance With The Provisions Of The TTMRA." After attending an instructor training course in New Zealand, the applicant was issued by the NZCAA with a Category C flight instructor rating with effect from 6 May 2002. That rating was endorsed on the back of his New Zealand Commercial Pilot Licence (Helicopter). In about mid-July 2005, the NZCAA detected what it regarded as anomalies in the flight times recorded in the applicant's log book and, on 13 July 2005, it suspended his New Zealand licence and Category C flight instructor's rating for 10 days. The NZCAA notified the applicant of that suspension by letter dated 13 July 2005. That suspension was extended to 12 August 2005 and the extension was notified to the applicant by letter dated 27 July 2005. With effect from 12 August 2005, the applicant's New Zealand Commercial Pilots Licence (Helicopter) and his flight instructor rating were revoked and the applicant was, by letter dated 12 August 2005, advised of the revocation and of his right to appeal against it to a New Zealand District Court. 3 Because he was no longer residing at the address to which they had been sent, the applicant received none of the three letters referred to in [2] above. He was, accordingly, unaware of the revocation of his New Zealand licence until 24 April 2006 when he received a letter from CASA dated 28 March 2006. That letter recited; 'The Civil Aviation Safety Authority of Australia (CASA) has been advised by the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand (NZCAA) that your New Zealand Commercial Pilot Helicopter Licence and your New Zealand Category C Instructor rating were revoked by the Director of the New Zealand Civil Aviation Authority on 12 August 2005 on disciplinary grounds.