EK to front court over SYD curfew breaches

[markis10]

Emirates has become the first airline to be charged with breaching the overnight curfew on flights at Sydney Airport since Jetstar was prosecuted six years ago.
After an investigation, the Department of Infrastructure and Transport has decided to push for charges to be laid against the Dubai-based airline for three alleged breaches of the curfew between late 2011 and January this year.
The airline faces a maximum fine of $550,000 for each breach of the curfew, which is designed to prevent commercial airlines from flying between 11pm and 6am at Kingsford Smith.
The department alleges that the most recent breach occurred on January 8 when Emirates flight EK413 took off from the airport bound for Dubai about 11.40pm – 40 minutes after the curfew takes effect.




Read more: Emirates charged with breaching overnight curfew at Sydney Airport

 

[maninblack]

Good news. Fine them the max every time.

 

[RooFlyer]

Question. An aircraft can't take off without ATC. Does ATC not need a waiver of the curfew, or be told there is a waiver obtained, from whichever authority can give it, before allowing a departure?

I note in the article there are 'shoulder' flights allowed, but it looks like EK weren't in that category.

 

[Mattg]

Question. An aircraft can't take off without ATC. Does ATC not need a waiver of the curfew, or be told there is a waiver obtained, from whichever authority can give it, before allowing a departure?

I note in the article there are 'shoulder' flights allowed, but it looks like EK weren't in that category.

AFAIK ATC can't actually tell an aircraft it is not allowed to depart/arrive due to curfew; only warn it that curfew is in place and fines apply for breaches etc.

 

[Isochronous]

Why can't EK countersue ATC for allowing them to fly?

 

[markis10]

Why can't EK countersue ATC for allowing them to fly?

Because ATC only give a clearance that ensures their are no obstacles in the way physically, laws are the PICs responsibility.

 

[anat0l]

Anyone know what kind of mitigating measures the EK legal team could be trying to arrange for that would justify them asking for more time?

 

[MarkD]

Curfew. Pffffffft. Don't wake up the fish in the bay. My v8 clubsport is loader than an A380. Money grabbing thieves they are. We all pay for it by higher fares

 

[Jack_OC]

AFAIK ATC can't actually tell an aircraft it is not allowed to depart/arrive due to curfew; only warn it that curfew is in place and fines apply for breaches etc.

That's bizarre. Surely the simplest and cheapest way of enforcing the curfew is to require ATC to prevent aircraft taking off.

 

[docjames]

What's the cost of cancelling the flight?

500 pax,
taxis to/from ap ($100ea)
Hotel rooms for a big chunk of them (250 @ $300ea)
Crewing costs (who knows), subsequent flights delayed due aircraft stuck (who knows but repeat above costs).

Taxis $50000
Hotels - about the same.

EK may have figured $550k was the better economic decision.

The curfew is daft in any event (noise profile of A380 or B787 vs the dc9/b727 when it was introduced???) but I'd say it comes down to an economic decision for EK.

 

[RooFlyer]

Anyone know what kind of mitigating measures the EK legal team could be trying to arrange for that would justify them asking for more time?

It would be tough:

Guidelines for The Granting of Dispensations for Aircraft to Use Sydney Airport During Curfew Hours in Exceptional Circumstances

 

[defurax]

I'm sure QR management will pay close attention to the court proceedings...

 

[Flying Fox]

Who gets the money at the end of the day/where does the money go if EK pay the fine?

Or does Department of Infrastructure and Transport simply have an AMAZING Christmas party?

 

[markis10]

Who gets the money at the end of the day/where does the money go if EK pay the fine?

Or does Department of Infrastructure and Transport simply have an AMAZING Christmas party?

Consolidated revenue is the phrase, same one used for all those lost bank accounts!

 

[medhead]

That's bizarre. Surely the simplest and cheapest way of enforcing the curfew is to require ATC to prevent aircraft taking off.

Clearly ATC do not have an enforcement function. Giving them such a role could distract from their primary safety function. Enforcement is not just handed out willy nilly for convenience.

Consolidated revenue is the phrase, same one used for all those lost bank accounts!

All government income is held in consolidated revenue. As we found out from the slush fund in South Australia, departments are not allowed to hold general, unallocated/budgeted funds.

 

[anat0l]

That's bizarre. Surely the simplest and cheapest way of enforcing the curfew is to require ATC to prevent aircraft taking off.

Anyone comment as to why ATC and the decision-making process related to the curfew are disjointed?

I can see some "benefits" as to why... or rather, I can see reasons why ATC would prefer not to be charged with the responsibility of denying / approving movements with respect to the curfew...

 

[Cool Cat Phil]

What's the cost of cancelling the flight?

500 pax,
taxis to/from ap ($100ea)
Hotel rooms for a big chunk of them (250 @ $300ea)
Crewing costs (who knows), subsequent flights delayed due aircraft stuck (who knows but repeat above costs).

Taxis $50000
Hotels - about the same.

EK may have figured $550k was the better economic decision.

The curfew is daft in any event (noise profile of A380 or B787 vs the dc9/b727 when it was introduced???) but I'd say it comes down to an economic decision for EK.

A very valid point. The fine is cheaper than all the costs involved for putting everyone up.

 

[Cool Cat Phil]

I'm sure QR management will pay close attention to the court proceedings...

I believe the SYD Curfew issue is the main reason for them why they don't fly to SYD.

 

[anat0l]

A very valid point. The fine is cheaper than all the costs involved for putting everyone up.

It's so comical when breaking the law becomes so justifiable!

(Not a stab statement, just comical)

 

[bismarck]

Always perplexed me why they couldn't at least have aircraft taking off/landing over the water as a minimum.

Even if you can justify not wanting planes flying over residential properties (which I still think is ridiculous) there's no justification for disallowing some form of restricted operation.