Air Ecosse Ltd v Civil Aviation Authority

JurisdictionScotland
Judgment Date03 July 1987
Docket NumberNo. 37.
Date03 July 1987
CourtCourt of Session (Inner House - Second Division)

SECOND DIVISION.

Lord Jauncey.

No. 37.
AIR ECOSSE LTD
and
CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY

Company Insolvency Air transport licence Application to revoke Proceedings against company subject to administration order Whether hearing to revoke air transport licences before Civil Aviation Authority were "proceedings" requiring the consent of the administrator or the leave of the court Civil Aviation Act 1982 (cap. 16), secs. 4 (1), 65 and 661 Insolvency Act 1986 (cap. 45), secs. 8 (3) and 11 (3).2

Statutory interpretation Words and phrases "Proceedings" Insolvency Act 1986 (cap. 45), sec. 11 (3) (d).2

Administrators were appointed to an ailing company under Pt. II of the Insolvency Act 1986. That company were holders of air transport licences for

2the Aberdeen to Wick and Sumburgh to Wick routes granted under sec. 65 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982. In March 1987 another airline company made application to the Civil Aviation Authority ("CAA") (1) for revocation of the two air transport licences of the first airline company under sec. 66 of the 1982 Act and (2) for a grant to the second company of licences for those routes under sec. 65 of that Act. A hearing on the second company's two applications was held by the CAA when the first company moved that the hearing be adjourned on the ground that the CAA lacked jurisdiction to entertain the applications because neither the consent of the joint administrators nor the leave of the court had been obtained under sec. 11 (3) (d) of the Insolvency Act 1986. That subsection enacts inter alia that: "During the period from which an administration order is enforced (d) no other proceedings may be commenced or continued against the company or its property except with the consent of the administrator or leave of the court." The motion was refused and the hearing proceeded on the merits of the applications. A petition was thereafter presented under the judicial review procedure to the Court of Session, the prayer of which sought (a) an order quashing the refusal of the said motion and (b) an order interdicting the CAA from entertaining further the applications by the second company or any other applications by that company in respect of the said routes, and, in

particular, from making any decision on the merits of the said applications, without the consent of the administrators or the leave of the Court of Session in respect of those applications, so long as the administration order remained in force. At the first hearing before the Lord Ordinary (Jauncey) the first company contended that: (1) the hearing before the CAA constituted "proceedings" within the terms of sec. 11 (3) (d) of the 1986 Act; and (2) the CAA had no power to hear an application to revoke the first company's licences under sec. 66 (3) (b) of the 1982 Act having regard to the terms of sec. 11 (3). The Lord Ordinary dismissed the petition, holding that "proceedings" in the context of sec. 11 (3) related primarily, if not entirely, to steps taken by creditors for the enforcement of their rights and, accordingly, the hearing before the CAA had not amounted to "proceedings" in terms of the Act. The petitioners thereafter reclaimed to the Inner House.

Held (aff. judgment of Lord Jauncey) (1) that the phrase "no other proceedings" in sec. 11 (3) (d) of the 1986 Act in its context had to be taken as ejusdem generiswith sec. 11 (3) (a), (b) and (c) to refer to proceedings by creditors or in relation to actual assets or property of the company and (2) that, the hearing before the CAA had not amounted to "proceedings" in terms of the statute; and reclaiming motionrefused.

Opinion that, in any event, there was no indication in the Act that Parliament had intended an administration order to preclude dealings by a licensing authority in the public interest without leave of the administrator of the court.

Air Ecosse Ltd., a company incorporated under the Companies Acts, and Christopher Morris, C.A., and Robert Wright Wilson, C.A., the joint administrators thereof presented a petition under the judicial review procedure to the Court of Session in which they sought review of proceedings before the Civil Aviation Authority ("CAA") brought under secs. 65 and 66 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 by British Airways plc relative to air transport licences...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Winsor and Special Railway Administrators of Railtrack Plc; Re, Railtrack Plc ((in Administration)) (No 2)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 10 July 2002
    ...however, so clear that they would be caught by section 11(3)(d). 38 Finally, I refer to the decision of the Inner House in Air Ecosse v Civil Aviation Authority anr [1987] 3 BCC 492. That decision is not binding on us but, as the Vice-Chancellor acknowledges, the views of the members of the......
  • The Environment Agency (Appellant) Paul Clark and Another (Respondents)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 10 February 2000
    ...debate about the ambit of these sub-sections. Mr Hockman relied strongly on Air Ecosse Limited and Others -v—Civil Aviation Authority (1987) 3 BCC 492, a decision of the Court of Session. Air Ecosse Ltd held air transport licences for the Aberdeen-Wick-Sumburgh air routes. British Airways a......
  • Re Rhondda Waste Disposal Company Ltd ((in Administration))
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 10 February 2000
    ...... against a company in administration, applied to criminal as well as civil proceedings. Administration was intended to provide a breathing space ...There was no authority for saying there was anything inherently wrong in the Chancery Division ......
  • The Financial Conduct Authority v Carillion Plc ((in Liquidation))
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 27 October 2021
    ...relevant moratorium – In Re Railtrack plc (in railway administration) [2002] 1 WLR 3002 and Air Ecosse Ltd v Civil Aviation Authority (1987) 3 BCC 492 – Norris J proceeded to state his conclusions at [47] – [48]: “47. In the instant case, I consider that the nature of the decision which th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT