Qatar to sue CAA for grounding carrier
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qatar to sue CAA for grounding carrier
Hi there, read this.
Jordan Times
Tuesday, July 17, 2001
Qatar to sue CAA for grounding carrier
By a staff reporter with agency dispatches
AMMAN — Prime Minister Ali Abul Ragheb confirmed on Monday Qatari plans for legal action against the Civil Aviation Authority for having grounded one of its aircraft in Amman for two weeks last month.
“[Qatar Airways] have sent us a legal notice that they are going to sue us,” Abul Ragheb told journalists at the Prime Ministry.
He said the notice, from a law firm in Doha, sought claims of up to $2.2 million for impounding the plane for two weeks.
“We feel that our legal position is very strong,” added the prime minister.
The aircraft, Airbus-320 was grounded on June 14 after it flew into the Queen Alia International Airport with the then-exiled Hamas leader Ibrahim Ghosheh on board.
The authorities denied the aircraft permission to take off after its pilot refused to reboard Ghosheh and take him back on a scheduled return trip.
A two-week standoff with Ghosheh was resolved after the 67-year-old Jordanian of Palestinian origin agreed to freeze all “political, information-related or organisational affiliation” to the resistance movement.
Only then did the CAA allow the plane to fly back to Qatar.
Transport Minister Nader Dahabi had told The Jordan Times that the authorities here went “by the book” and that their measures were “flawless.”
On Monday, Abul Ragheb echoed the same line when he said Jordan was on solid “legal grounds” when it told the airliner it had to fly Ghosheh back on the same plane that flew him in.
Has anybody ever heard about it?
Cheers.
Jordan Times
Tuesday, July 17, 2001
Qatar to sue CAA for grounding carrier
By a staff reporter with agency dispatches
AMMAN — Prime Minister Ali Abul Ragheb confirmed on Monday Qatari plans for legal action against the Civil Aviation Authority for having grounded one of its aircraft in Amman for two weeks last month.
“[Qatar Airways] have sent us a legal notice that they are going to sue us,” Abul Ragheb told journalists at the Prime Ministry.
He said the notice, from a law firm in Doha, sought claims of up to $2.2 million for impounding the plane for two weeks.
“We feel that our legal position is very strong,” added the prime minister.
The aircraft, Airbus-320 was grounded on June 14 after it flew into the Queen Alia International Airport with the then-exiled Hamas leader Ibrahim Ghosheh on board.
The authorities denied the aircraft permission to take off after its pilot refused to reboard Ghosheh and take him back on a scheduled return trip.
A two-week standoff with Ghosheh was resolved after the 67-year-old Jordanian of Palestinian origin agreed to freeze all “political, information-related or organisational affiliation” to the resistance movement.
Only then did the CAA allow the plane to fly back to Qatar.
Transport Minister Nader Dahabi had told The Jordan Times that the authorities here went “by the book” and that their measures were “flawless.”
On Monday, Abul Ragheb echoed the same line when he said Jordan was on solid “legal grounds” when it told the airliner it had to fly Ghosheh back on the same plane that flew him in.
Has anybody ever heard about it?
Cheers.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Popay
It indeed WAS big news in the region at the time, but it was over 4 years ago! All has since been resolved and the aircraft in question is no longer in the QR fleet, but is now flying with Air Deccan. Very minor diplomatic incident, but relatively short lived.
A300
It indeed WAS big news in the region at the time, but it was over 4 years ago! All has since been resolved and the aircraft in question is no longer in the QR fleet, but is now flying with Air Deccan. Very minor diplomatic incident, but relatively short lived.
A300
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A300Man-2005,
Thanks man I can read the date. Would be interested of, how did they resolve the incident? Was that brought to the court or not? Quite unusual course of actions anyway from Jordanian authority, isn’t it? As far as I know the authority can hold the airplane on ground if reasonably in doubt about the safe conduct of the flight or there is a valid verdict from the court to arrest the plane.
Just for interest sake, do you know anything more?
Thanks.
Thanks man I can read the date. Would be interested of, how did they resolve the incident? Was that brought to the court or not? Quite unusual course of actions anyway from Jordanian authority, isn’t it? As far as I know the authority can hold the airplane on ground if reasonably in doubt about the safe conduct of the flight or there is a valid verdict from the court to arrest the plane.
Just for interest sake, do you know anything more?
Thanks.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southern england
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wasn't it more about satisfying entry requirements? Qatar Airways had flown Ghosheh to Amman, even though Amman had said that they wouldn't allow him into the country, until he had renounced his links with Hamas. It was Jordan who had deported him previously. Is it not the airline that is responsible for returning passengers refised entry, to the port of embarkation? However, Captain Bedeiwi would not let him board the aircraft, because he did not have a valid re-entry visa for Qatar. Oh, and Ghosheh was also a Jordanian national, to confuse things even more! I think he eventuallly went to Bangkok, and was allowed back into Jordan about two weeks later, after he issued the required renouncement.
Have never seen any mention of a court case, successful or otherwise, but then I can't read Arabic!
Have never seen any mention of a court case, successful or otherwise, but then I can't read Arabic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Newswatcher,
Thanks for elaboration.
Its interesting case, because of course the entry requirements are up to state regulation. Immigration can allow or deny the entry for verity of the reasons, including political.
If, the immigration denies entry permission, its responsibility of the airline to arrange deportation of the relevant person. That can be done two ways, either take him back or if denied embarkation for any reason by the captain, on expenses of the airline. In other words the immigration has got a custody room, where the person will be held, as long as necessary and obviously provided beverages and soft drinks. The next step would be deportation it self in any for the immigration service convenient way. That might even be a private jet. The costs would have had to bear QR. Normally the immigration issue shouldn’t be a concern of the captain, as long as the relevant ground staff has given their OK for boarding. However the Captain has the final authority to decide, whether to allow or to refuse the embarkation for safety reasons. Therefore I am quite surprised about the course of actions chosen the Jordanian CAA. The costs caused to QR are immense and unjustified, as far as my judgment concerns. I clearly would have taken them to court, unless other solution has been proposed.
Cheers.
Thanks for elaboration.
Its interesting case, because of course the entry requirements are up to state regulation. Immigration can allow or deny the entry for verity of the reasons, including political.
If, the immigration denies entry permission, its responsibility of the airline to arrange deportation of the relevant person. That can be done two ways, either take him back or if denied embarkation for any reason by the captain, on expenses of the airline. In other words the immigration has got a custody room, where the person will be held, as long as necessary and obviously provided beverages and soft drinks. The next step would be deportation it self in any for the immigration service convenient way. That might even be a private jet. The costs would have had to bear QR. Normally the immigration issue shouldn’t be a concern of the captain, as long as the relevant ground staff has given their OK for boarding. However the Captain has the final authority to decide, whether to allow or to refuse the embarkation for safety reasons. Therefore I am quite surprised about the course of actions chosen the Jordanian CAA. The costs caused to QR are immense and unjustified, as far as my judgment concerns. I clearly would have taken them to court, unless other solution has been proposed.
Cheers.
Last edited by popay; 3rd Oct 2005 at 16:11.
