FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1949
1949 - 1952.PDF
FLIGHT, i December 1949 FOR HIRE or REWARD" Test Case of Great Importance to the Private Pilot A Croydon Magistrates' Court on November 25th there wasdecided a case which is of vital importaace to all holdersof Private Pilot's Licences.The action was brought at the instance of the Crown against Mr. T. Hoggaerts (a British subject and an associate memberof the Royal Aero Club) under the Air Navigation Order of April 1st, 1948 (as enabled by the Air Navigation Act, 1947).The facts of the case were simply that Mr. Hoggaerts, who was the holder of a Private Pilot's Licence, hired an aircraft andflew to Paris on April 15th of this year, taking with him two friends, one of whom paid £6 and the other £11 "as a con-tribution to the expenses of the journey." The Crown prosecuted Mr. Hoggaerts under Section 18 (1)and (2) of the Order, contending that he was not the holder of the appropriate licence, which is required by the Act, becausethe very fact that his passengers had paid money connected with the passage converted the machine into a " public trans-port aircraft" which is defined in the Order as "an aircraft carrying passengers for hire or reward." An additional chargerelated to the added safety regulation required for '' public transport aircraft "; but the main point at issue was to deter-mine whether "a contribution towards expenses" did in fact constitute " carrying passengers or goods for hire or reward." Counsel for the defence conducted the case with greatability and persuasion, contending that Mr. Hoggaerts was merely carrying acquaintances and that the sums of moneypaid by them to him bore no relation to the fares charged for such a journey in a strictly commercial aircraft; in fact, theywere meant to be nothing more than an assistance to a young and enthusiastic pilot who would not otherwise have beenable to bear the whole expenses of such a journey. No contract of hire was ever made and no reward in the usually acceptedmeaning of the word was ever intended. Counsel then stressed that, as in the similar cases of carsand taxis under the Road Traffic Act, 1930, the courts had considered that the words " hire or reward " could be subjectto some measure of interpretation as appropriate to the sur- rounding circumstances. In conclusion, he pointed out to theCourt the importance of the case as a test-case, which, if it was found to be proved against Mr. Hoggaerts, would have aconsiderable stultifying effect upon all private pilots, who could not afford to defray out of their own pockets the full chargesinvolved in private flying. This in its turn would react very unfavourably upon the activities of private flying clubs, withobvious undesirable consequences. The Bench, however, decided for the Crown and declined to accept the argument that Mr. Hoggaerts had received themoney merely as " a contribution towards expenses.'' He was accordingly convicted upon both principal charges, althoughthe fine imposed was a nominal one. There thus seems little doubt that almost every private pilotin this country must at some time have broken the law—by splitting expenses with friends or others when flying tomeetings, rallies or other events. Even if four people agree to share only the cost of the petrol for a flight in an aircraftbelonging to one of them, the fact that money is paid in con- nection with a passage apparently constitutes an infringement,flying for reward being involved. In America, the Bureau of Safety Regulation of the CivilAeronautics Board has proposed a revision of the current civil air regulation 43.60 to clarify the privileges of the private pilot.This regulation states that '' a private pilot shall not pilot aircraft for hire " but an explanatory note adds that the rulepermits the sharing of expenses of a flight or piloting an aircraft in furtherance of a business when the flight is madesolely for the personal transportation of the pilot. The proposed revision would establish, inter alia, thefollowing points: Passengers may contribute to the operational expenses of the flight; an airline official may pilot a companyaircraft incidental to his employment and carry friends or fellow employees provided no charge is made; a farmer mayspray or dust his own crops, but not his neighbour's for com- pensation; and a private pilot may not demonstrate an aircraftfor sale as an employee of, or for the benefit of, someone in the business of selling aircraft. The proposed amendment to Section 43.60 would read "aprivate pilot shall not pilot an aircraft for hire or in connection with any business or employment unless the flight is merelyincidental thereto and does not involve the carriage of persons or property for compensation or hire." It is to be hoped that some amendment to the NavigationAct of 1947 will be made to clarify the position in this country, particularly so that private owners of aircraft andmembers of clubs may be permitted to share expenses. If, incidentally, a paragraph similar to the last of thosequoted above from the proposed American revision were adopted, it would penalize almost every British test pilot.Although quite obviously they demonstrate aircraft with the definite object of helping their employers to sell them, themajority, nevertheless, carry only a private pilot's A Licence (together with the approval of the Ministry of Supply). Theanomaly, however, is an obvious one. ITALY WIDE AWAKE F reproducing this illustration of a new Fiat type it would,we think, be a pity to endeavour to improve on the pic- turesque description which has accompanied it from an Italian source: — " A new plane built by the FIAT group disigned on new lines for displaying touring service, acrobating train flight school, passed its last testing flight conditions control, with fine results. "Entirely metallic, equiped with a motor Alfa 115-1. bis,Piaggio 1030 constant revolution propeller and with the up-to- date equipement. overhanging wings, fitted with wingflaps,tandem binnacle and retractable landing gear, hydraulic drive control, electric equipment for board service and for nightflight, complete radio set and radio range equipment, direc- tional gyro instrument ior blind flying, etc. In trial porform ances has shown very short take off times, high rate of climb,high cruising range, safe and quick landing. '' This plane with its new lines and perfectionate equipmentstands to indicate the effective rise of the Italians aircrafts constructors after the long forced drowsiness caused by last "Entirely metallic"—the Fiat G. 46 so picturesquely described above. ODD SPOTTINGS A CCORDING to the preface, The Observer's Book of Air-J-i craft* is intended as " a guide to the identification of many types of aircraft which are already well known by name." Itis nicely printed on art paper and well illustrated. Unfor- tunately, the information given does not achieve the same highstandard. The Convair XC-99 transport is illustrated with silhouettesof the B-36 bomber. The Martin Mars flying boat is said to have distinctive "twin oval fins and rudders," but the photo-graph shows it flying quite cheerfully with only one of each. Mr. Lawrence has discovered many other novel recognitionfeatures; for example, the Hawker N7/46 js apparently "Generally like-the D.H. 108, but has a tailplane." The author does not explain why he includes such aircraftas the Hughes Hercules, which very few spotters are ever likely to see, or the Republic Rainbow transport, which even fewerwill see, as it was never built. There are some facts in The Observer's Book of Aircraftwith which no one will disagree, particularly the author's remark on page 8: "... don't assume that everything yousee and read in this book is absolutely correct." *By Joseph Lawrence. Frederick Warne and Co. Ltd. Price 4s. fid. net. D l6
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
