Sorry for silence from my side, but we agreed with the lawyers that until we do not receive information from the European bodies addressed with legal letters – it will be better to wait with comments.
But it looks like high time I presented the results, we have got responses from the European Commission Competition DG (ECCDG) and European Commission Directorate General for Mobility and Transport (ECDGMT). Unfortunately still nothing from the European Parliament, but let’s stop waiting eventually (maybe they do not have time due to upcoming elections…) and discuss what we have got.
The answers are not necessary as foreseen, particularly the one of ECCDG looks like an excuse from starting the investigation due to other priorities, lack of evidence (we provided many …) etc. ECCDG did not decide to start the antimonopoly investigation for whatever reasons they have, ECDGMT states that the GA issues are being managed at a national level.
After a discussion with the lawyers we decided that in the current situation the best further dealing will be to continue/repeat the process at national levels. As a positive outcome of the EU probing (hard to find more…) is that at least it is clear and confirmed that national bodies are responsible for the GA segment. We find it a valuable confirmation. Quite often in cases of a potential overlap of the national and EU regulations the national bodies point at “EU level competency” as an excuse for not looking into the case. With the information of ECDGMT it should be much more difficult, we hope.
So it was agreed that the legal team will prepare the formal documents for probing now at the national level (Poland) for national antimonopoly and the CAA offices. The argumentation of EU level to a large extend will be repeated, with the attached document from ECDGMT pointing at the national authorities responsible for an action in the GA area. The document will also be translated into English, so if any party (like national AOPA’s, other aviation associations, etc) wishes to take advantage of it (parts of it) and repeat the process at some other national bodies – it will be ready for use . Let’s keep protesting against the airports/handlers cost issues in Europe and let’s hope this will be heard somewhere…
This is the current plan, after the responses we got. We should have the national level document ready in few weeks.
Under the link: https://we.tl/t-PGle0nGXGv
please find attached the former lead letter requesting the EU level investigation (sorry Flyingwineman for repeating it bit late…) and the answers we got from ECCDG and ECDGMT.
Thanks for that update Bart.
In the UK the organisation is the Competitions and Markets Authority: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/competition-and-markets-authority
The last time I checked with AOPA UK, which was a couple of years ago, they said they were powerless to influence price, or words to that effect. Also given the limited income they have from membership fees, they have been focused on other higher priority goals such as pilot licensing, and aircraft certification.
The closest they did do was try to make sure pilots could self-handle under the Groundhandling 96/97/EC Directive, which transposed to the Airports Groundhandling Regulations 1997 in the UK, but nobody at the UK CAA seems bothered to progress it since CAP 1409 was released in May 2016: https://www.caa.co.uk/Commercial-industry/Airports/Economic-regulation/Competition-policy/Airports-Groundhandling-Regulations-1997/
Hi. On October 16th, in PMI, as part of the international congress on aviation law, Piotr KASPRZYK of ‘Legal action against pricing of airports/handlers" fame will lecture on the subject. He’s the lawyer that mostly managed this action initiated by @Bart
In case interested, plse see enclosed program. You can also let me know, since I happen to know the organizer Irene from sharing a few kids, a home and a few more miscellaneous items with her.
BTW @Mooneydriver, Irene one of the most renowned experts in the matter of criminal processes vs reporting systems on which Switzerland (together with France) has become the infamous European leader.
Antonio wrote:
BTW @Mooneydriver, Irene one of the most renowned experts in the matter of criminal processes vs reporting systems on which Switzerland (together with France) has become the infamous European leader.
Glad to hear that. I also hear that the 40. General Assembly of ICAO appears to have that particular problem on their agenda, not sure if the program is accurate but I got this out of a source:
Qu
CANDIDATURE OF ARAB MEMBER STATES
АЯВЛЕНИЕ РОССИЙСКОЙ ФЕДЕРАЦИИ
FINANCING FOR QUALITY AVIATION INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
THE SINGLE AFRICAN AIR TRANSPORT MARKET: SUSTAINABLE REGULATORY SYSTEM
ADVANCING INITIATIVES THAT SUPPORT WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION IN AVIATION
THE EXPERIENCE OF THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES IN EMPOWERING WOMEN IN AVIATION
REPORT ON THE EVOLUTION OF THE UNIVERSAL SAFETY OVERSIGHT AUDIT PROGRAMME (USOAP) CONTINUOUS MONITORING APPROACH (CMA)
TARGETED AND PRECISE OVERSIGHT IN THE CIVIL AVIATION INDUSTRY OF CHINA
CRIMINALIZING ACCIDENTS AND INCIDENTS THREATENS AVIATION SAFETY
ICAO GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL TRENDS – PRESENT AND FUTURE AIRCRAFT NOISE AND EMISSIONS
UPDATE ON THE CARBON OFFSETTING AND REDUCTION SCHEME FOR INTERNATIONAL AVIATION (CORSIA)
James_Chan wrote:
but nobody at the UK CAA seems bothered to progress it since CAP 1409 was released in May 2016:
The latest update I have on this is that while the UK CAA process applications to limit the number of self-handling users or limit the number of third party handlers, it unfortunately does not have the powers to carry out enforcement of various obligations in the Regulations.
Airports that are not already fully complaint can, however, face civil action through the courts as provided for in these Regulations.
