Annual Report 2006-07: External scrutiny
- Media coverage and outlook
- Review of CASA’s regulatory decisions
- Federal Court prohibition orders
- Administrative Appeals Tribunal review of freedom of information decisions
A total of 1,739 stories mentioning CASA were monitored in the Australian media during 2006–07. Seventy per cent of this coverage directly involved CASA through a media release or spokesperson.
The tone of the coverage was recorded as neutral (70 per cent), positive (3 per cent) or negative (27 per cent). A large proportion of the negative coverage centred around the Lockhart River accident.
Certain types of regulatory decisions made by CASA are subject to review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. ‘Merits’ review involves the reconsideration of an administrative decision. On the facts before it, the tribunal decides whether the correct or (in a discretionary area) the preferable decision has been made in accordance with the applicable law.
A person who is the subject of a CASA decision may apply directly to the Federal Court for a review of the decision under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977, or may appeal a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal following a first appeal to the tribunal itself.
Table 7 shows the status of merits reviews of CASA regulatory decisions by the tribunal for 2006–07 and the previous four financial years. Table 8 details the categories of decisions appealed to the tribunal in 2006–07. Table 9 summarises the status of applications to the Federal Court for judicial review for the period 2002–03 to 2006–07.
|Applications on hand from the previous year||17||16||15||18||14|
|Applications lodged during the year||17||16||18||21||12|
|Matters dealt witha|
|Decisions set aside||2||2||1||6||1|
|Status of other matters|
|Applications withdrawn by the applicant||9||8||10||8||5|
|Applications remaining on hand at 30 June||16||16||18||14||10|
Note: The types of decisions that can be appealed to the tribunal are listed on its website at <www.aat.gov.au/LegislationAndJurisdiction/JurisdictionList.htm>.
a Does not include interlocutory decisions (that is, decisions made during the progress of an action).
|Flight crew licence (including ratings and endorsements)||Aircraft maintenance licence or maintenance authority (including ratings)||Medical certificate||Air operator’s certificate||Certificate of approval||Certificate of registration or airworthiness||Chief pilot approval||Maintenance controller approval||Total|
|Refusal to issue||1||0||6||0||0||0||0||0||7|
|Issue subject to conditions not sought by applicant for the authorisation||0||0||0||0||0||0||0||0||0|
|Variation/imposition of conditions not sought by holder||0||0||1||0||0||0||0||0||1|
|Filed by subject person||Filed by CASA||Filed by subject person||Filed by CASA||Filed by subject person||Filed by CASA||Filed by subject person||Filed by CASA||Filed by subject person||Filed by CASA|
|Matters with the Court|
|Applications on hand from the previous year||2||0||0||0||1||1||2||1||2||0|
|Applications filed during the year||2||1||1||2||4||1||3||0||1||0|
|Matters dealt with|
|Decisions set aside/overturned||0||0||0||0||1||1||0||0||0||0|
|Status of other matters|
|Applications on hand||0||0||1||2||2||1||2||0||0||0|
|Decisions arising from Administrative Appeals Tribunal decision||4||1||1||0||1||0||0||1||0||0|
In accordance with amendments to the Civil Aviation Act 1988 that came into effect on 21 February 2003, CASA may suspend a civil aviation authorisation for five business days, without issuing a show cause notice, where there is a serious and imminent safety risk. Such suspensions then cease unless CASA applies to the Federal Court for a prohibition order before the expiry of the five-day period.
CASA made one application to the Federal Court for a prohibition order during 2006–07. This was in relation to the air operator’s certificate held by Lessbrook Pty Ltd (trading as Transair) that CASA had suspended. CASA discontinued its application because Transair requested that the certificate be revoked.
No applications were made in 2006–07 to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to review any decisions made by CASA under the Freedom of Information Act 1982.
In 2006–07, CASA participated in Comcover’s risk management benchmarking survey. CASA achieved a score of 7 out of 10, which resulted in a 7.1 per cent discount in CASA’s insurance premiums for 2007–08. This was an improvement on our 2005–06 result and again placed CASA in the top quartile of Comcover agencies.
Australian National Audit Office
There were no Australian National Audit Office audits or cross-agency reviews of CASA during 2006–07, other than the usual certification of CASA’s financial statements.