Regarding information in the AIP: At least on the VAC charts, the information section in the end that also contains details about customs and police (or, for Peter: immigration), is preceded by this disclaimer:
Les informations de source non DGAC de cette rubrique sont communiquées sous toute réserve.
Non DGAC information in this document is communicated with all reserve.
Which means that if it contradicts the law, then the law will be what counts.
Everything that is an excerpt from or summary of the law is not legally binding. Otherwise one wouldn’t need the law in the first place. I would think this is a principle found world wide, maybe to a somewhat lesser extent in the few countries that never bothered to put their law in a book.
I can guarantee that a German judge would not care about an AIP or some website from the customs but look in the applicable law (here: EU law) to determine that you have broken the law. When thinking about sentencing, he will consider the AIP or website and in the end, the sentence might be just symbolic.
Peter wrote:
you have to waste a chunk of your life and your money on a good lawyer who is not “locally involved” and is thus willing to take you on as a client.
Please do not hint to France being a corrupt country because it’s not. If you get accused by the French state of having committed a crime, your treatment will not be less fair than in the UK or Germany.
Everything that is an excerpt from or summary of the law is not legally binding. Otherwise one wouldn’t need the law in the first place. I would think this is a principle found world wide, maybe to a somewhat lesser extent in the few countries that never bothered to put their law in a book.
I can guarantee that a German judge would not care about an AIP or some website from the customs but look in the applicable law (here: EU law) to determine that you have broken the law. When thinking about sentencing, he will consider the AIP or website and in the end, the sentence might be just symbolic.
That is not justice for the citizen, however, IF the “guidance material” is published by the Govt. In the UK, you have a reasonable expectation of getting accurate info from all official sources. So if the ANO says that you need an IR to fly IFR, but the CAA publishes a guidance sheet saying you can fly IFR on a PPL, it will be impossible for the CAA to prosecute until after they removed the guidance paper. And then only for new offences.
That is how the law is supposed to work.
France is not corrupt any more than say the UK. A solicitor here once told me “you will never get a local solicitor to stand up in a court and say a policeman is lying. If you want one to do that you will have to get one from outside the area”. But here in the UK they won’t commence a prosecution unless there is a fair chance of success, nowadays.
Peter wrote:
But here in the UK they won’t commence a prosecution unless there is a fair chance of success, nowadays.
In Sweden, they’re not permitted to commence a prosecution unless they expect success. In the prosecutor’s opinion, of course.
I’ve contacted the PAF and the Gendarmerie regarding Pontoise. After the usual table tennis game (Gendarme: " This is a matter for the Police" – Police: “This is a matter for the Gendarmerie”) I finally got an answer, not the one we’re looking for I’m afraid. The Notam has removed the “prohibited” because Pontoise has been removed from the list of the ports of entry.
However the head of the PAF hinted that this was not the final status, and that there is still hope for Pontoise. I’ll let you guys decide how much credit you want to give to that.
Someone asked (but then deleted the post) about flying Spain – France – UK.
The answer is that Spain and France are both Schengen so you can fly freely between those two. The departure from France to the UK has to be via an airport which supports Immigration (what the French call “police” in their AIP), and the arrival in the UK is taken care of by the usual GAR system.
But I have a Q: if the French AIP says “police” and gives a contact number for it, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the airport supports Immigration, does it? See the Pontoise example.
Peter, sorry it was I. After I started the post, I then remembered that I have done this a number of times, however, have ALWAYS done it via a fully fledged Customs and Immigration field,as per the AIP for those fields. I have purchased a Super Cub, which after maintenance I will transit VFR up through Spain, from Cordoba through France, to Scotland. On reviewing the map that had been posted, and the following discussion, I then, as you have highlighted, wondered if I could drop into any field from Spain, but exit from a full Immigration field to get to the UK? For obvious reasons, I did not want to get into a jam in a French airfield, flying a Spanish registered Cub, purchased in Spain, and transiting to the UK, for final residency. I am currently gathering every single piece of ’’Paperwork’’, I think I may need. And then some…….I will post the VFR trip report, which may be interesting.
I could drop into any field from Spain, but exit from a full Immigration field to get to the UK?
Yes, simply that.
Leave France via one of the usual suspects e.g. Cherbourg, Caen, Deauville, Le Touquet, Calais, etc. Caen at €5 and a trivial airside procedure is the one I have used, but all of these are quick.
Obviously L2K and Calais offer the shortest water crossing.
Calais has a PNR requirement, IIRC. L2K has too but nobody seem to know what it is 
Peter wrote:
A solicitor here once told me “you will never get a local solicitor to stand up in a court and say a policeman is lying. If you want one to do that you will have to get one from outside the area”
I can’t buy this any lawyer will claim this if you engage him and cover his time with sufficient funding.
I can’t buy this
Well, I can confirm that I disregarded his warning and used him, and he washed his hands of the job (basically did nothing in the way of a defence).
any lawyer will claim this if you engage him and cover his time with sufficient funding.
I am not sure that is always true because while “you” may be 1-2 days’ work for him, he has to make a living the other 363-364 days, and if he p1sses off the prosecutor (who prob90 is another freemason and a rotarian – this was Worthing, which had 14 masonic lodges at the time) his life will be more complicated and it isn’t worth his trouble. We are talking about the small-fry street corner solicitor here; this guy did some house sale work for me. As in any other area of expertise, one needs to use a specialist
