International laws

[Edward Terry]

G'day all,

For international flights that don't originate or terminate in Australia but which are Australian-registered, under whose laws these are these flights conducted? What are some examples of how international aviation laws differ from domestic legislation? By the way this - rarely - has nothing to do with an assignment :).

Cheers
Ed

[Rhys Xanthis]

An example would be LAX-JFK for QF if you are looking for one, and vice versa for united, SYD-MEL.

[Mick F]

Ed, as far as I understand, if a VH registered aircraft is operating overseas, then it is operating under Australian Law. Same for other countries as well.

On a semi related note, if a baby were to be born on an Australian registered aircraft, then that baby is then a citizen of the country, ;).

I can't think of the actual Reg, but it'd be under the CAR's 1988 or CASR's 1998.

Cheers

Mick

[Philip Argy]

For the most part the aircraft is subject to the law of the jurisdiction whose airspace it occupies. So, for example, a murder committed on a QF sector between LAX and JFK would be governed by the criminal law of the state over which the aircraft was flying at the time the offence was committed. If this could not be ascertained US federal law would apply in respect of a crime committed on an aircraft.

The position is different over international waters where no jurisdiction has any particular nexus claim. In those circumstances, as is the case also with ships and spacecraft, the flag carrier jurisdiction applies.

Overlay all this with various international conventions that govern specifics like what law applies to a satellite in geostationary orbit, what law governs contracts made on a ship or aircraft, what law governs liability for aircraft accidents, etc.

[Mick F]

Can I please have an explanation as to the relevance of Rhys' post? I had my statement deleted, yet Rhys' irrelevant post remains?

Mick

[Grant Smith]

Ed, as far as I understand, if a VH registered aircraft is operating overseas, then it is operating under Australian Law. Same for other countries as well.

I thought it was the other way around, the aircraft is governed by the laws of the country that it is in and not the country of origin...

This applies only to civil aircraft, state owned or operated aircraft are not subject to the same jurisdiction...

[Nick W.]

Can I please have an explanation as to the relevance of Rhys' post? I had my statement deleted, yet Rhys' irrelevant post remains?

Mick

As Per Board 'Conditions of Use'

4. Moderation

4.0.1 You acknowledge that the Board is a moderated service.

4.1 You acknowledge and agree that the Moderators, as providers of the Board service, reserve any and all rights to censor, block, edit, delete, re-position or otherwise alter Messages originated by You on the Board, without notice to You, at any time.

[Grant Smith]

Here's the link to the ICAO (http://www.icao.int/icaonet/arch/doc/7300/7300_9ed.pdf) document that outlines the type of things you're after Ed

[Edward Terry]

Thanks for the help guys. ICAO never fails to impress!

[Andrew P]

An example would be LAX-JFK for QF if you are looking for one, and vice versa for united, SYD-MEL.

can't delete my original post as see someone else questioned the benefit of Rhys' post

in fact these flights are not examples as they are domestic routes within a country, a more pertinent example Rhys would be BKK-LHR, between 2 sovereign countries.

Banjo