CODE 18-77
SS 8/78
Mr Gilft fift
RESTRICTED
Minute Qu/s চল
AIR SERVICES: HONG KONG/LONDON
1.
Reference
HKK 184,
.IN
INDEX
мо
..
4 MAR
OSSCER
J15.41
HEK
6
** 184/0
10
Mr Murray raised a number of points on my minute of 17 March. I discussed these with MAED.
2. On (a) CPA will not be permitted to put forward evidence in support of their application which was not available to the CAA at the time they took their decision on the original applications. Apart from that, there are no restrictions on the grounds on which CPA might appeal. This should be made in writing and within 21 days either from the day of notification of the CAA's decision or 21 days from the date of receipt of the records of the pro- ceedings, whichever is the later. When CPA make their appeal, the other parties concerned are informed and they in turn have 14 days in which to comment. During this period the CAA also has the option to amplify on the reasons for its decision. The next stage would be for CPA to reply to the comments on their appeal. It is open to the Secretary of State to seek amplification of any of the evidence, on the appeals or on any of the comments.
The
3. On (b), I think we shall have to wait for Hong Kong's comments to know on what grounds CPA are likely to base their appeal. ball is firmly in their court. Since the Hong Kong Government took part in the original negotiations, it is open to them to intervene on CPA's behalf in support of the company's appeal.
4. On (c), the Secretary of State for Trade can take any other evidence into account which he considers relevant. It is therefore open to us to intervene if we consider that there are important political factors which need to be taken into account in considering any appeal. This would probably best be done by Ministerial correspondence.
5. Apart from CPA, MAED think that Laker is almost certain to appeal as well.
19 March 1980
Cc: Miss Stoddart, MAED
1. Morrice
P Morrice
Hong Kong and General Department
RESTRICTED
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.