mande
direction on policy,prounds (nava
AM
grounds are still valid and woul
Who. A
CA
a
case for asking him to reconsider his lion joi
Z
We agree that in Nott is likely to weɔme consideration of the application, because i
ཀྭ འ i'
in the circumstances if no appeal wor m
}
be
aminer atever
3
iL
that 11 tic
:
1
whether or not CAA on' the
the CAA may come to. An appeal would be lindy he ** Secretary of State had previourly given a directio applicants should be on equal otin ATLA had reached the same conclusion. e share your hope is a public dispute can be avoided. The comment which we maio in parts, trang 5 of our telno 67 are of course relevent to the goal stare.
+
4 Your second TIR. The DOT a’e Aviation Bill covering a number of
ing to
a Civil
ugeren?
ill in bi
prepared for publication early is the te
whic.
Ministers are aware of the points thie, you ben.
上
100