5.
The ATLA is bound by statutory regulations originally made under the (UK) Air Navigation Act 1936. These provide that the overriding object is to ensure "the most effective service to the public while avoiding uneconomical overlapping". There is no provision in the regulations for an appeal against a decision by the ATLA. Nor is there provision for the Hong Kong Government to give directions to the ATLA though the Government may appear at hearings and make objections or representations.
6.
In pursuance of the decision recorded in paragraph 3 above, the Hong Kong Government made representations to the ATLA on the applications by BCal, Laker and CPA, and appeared at the hearing in November 1979. Each of the three applicants objected to the applications of the others, and BA objected to all three applications.
7.
The decision of the ATLA (announced at the end of November 1979) was to license CPA and BCal for a period of five years (the maximum period for which the ATLA can grant a licence). BCal were restricted for a period of two years to four return flights per week, and CPA to three. The application by Laker was refused.
8.
In early December the Attorney General briefed Members on the possible consequences arising from the ATLA decision, and outlined the procedures for the CAA hearing in London. It was agreed that the Attorney General and the Financial Secretary should have discretion to modify the Government's stance in the light of circumstances as they developed.
The CAA hearing
9.
The UK Civil Aviation Act 1971 and the regulations made thereunder, which govern the activities of the CAA, provide for appeal against a CAA decision to the Secretary of state for Trade. The Act also provides that the Secretary of state may give the Authority directions, inter alia, in connection with a matter affecting the relations of the UK with an overseas territory.
CONFIDENTIAL
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.