TNAG-0870-FCO40-1080-Air-services-between-Hong-Kong-and-the-UK-1979 — Page 94

Mr

McLaren

Hong Kong & General Dept

RESTRICTED

Reference....

likk 184/5.

23

WED IN RESISTOY NO. 51

- 9 AUG 1979

REGISTRY Plon Taken

Section

3 (1x a) of

CODE 18-77

AIR SERVICES ON THE

1.

LONDON/HONG KONG ROUTE

Sex 24

23

We spoke about the procedures the DOT are proposing Tor dealing with applications for air services on the London/Hong Kong route.

2. BCAL, Laker and CPA have now all applied to the CAA for a licence and BA has lodged an objection. At the moment therefore there are 4 parties

4 parties to the case. The CAA have to give 14 days' notice in writing of the date of hearing. At the moment they have a very full programme and are unlikely to be able to fit in

a hearing on this route before October at the earliest. The length of the hearing would depend on the extent of the evidence submitted by the parties. Each party can present both written and oral evidence and examine any other party.

3. Once the CAA has given its decision, any party has a right of appeal to the Secretary of State for Trade. This is made in writing (there is no further hearing) and the other parties and the CAA itself may send in written comments. Because of the various time limits in the regulations it could be over

2 months from the date of the CAA decision before all the papers cauddbe submitted to the Secretary of State for Trade. At that stage "the Secretary of State may, if he thinks fit, uphold the decision of the Authority or direct it to rehear the case which is the subject of the appeal or to reverse or vary its decision".

4

The DOT admit that the Civil Aviation Act gives the CAA particular responsibilities in respect of airlines which have their principal place of business in the United Kingdom. They point out that the Act qualifies this with the phrase

"so far as British airlines may reasonably be expected to provide such services" and argue that in practice CAA will deal fairly with CPA's application and that in any case all the relevant evidence will be brought out at the hearing. If the CAA's only reason for not awarding a Licence to CPA was the terms of the Civil Aviation Act they would no doubt make this clear.

5. If CPA were unhappy with the CAA decision they could appeal and the regulations make it clear that the Secretary of State for Trade is not precluded from consulting the Hong Kong Government and taking into account our relations with Hong Kong even while an appeal is pending. The DOT maintain that their Minister does not rule out the possibility of varying the CAA's decision on appeal even though he is reluctant to give them directions in advance of the hearing. They therefore claim that Hong Kong will in the end get fair treatment even though of course no guarantee of the route. I would have thought that BCAL and Laker would be much more likely to object if the Minister changed the rules at the end of the game rather than the beginning, but this is essentially a matter for the DOT. The main disadvantage of the procedure from

RESTRICTED

/our