Z Air wins fight over permit to fly to St. Maarten
PHILIPSBURG — Curacao-based airline Z Air obtained a positive court ruling about its conflict with the government of St. Maarten this month. The court ruled that St Maarten’s Civil Aviation Authority’s (SMCAA) demand that Z Air submit a letter signed by the American Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) that outlines the responsibilities about the maintenance of its five-plane fleet does not make sense and that it cannot be made a condition for a permit to fly to St. Maarten.
The government has “insufficiently made clear and insufficiently substantiated that this letter is necessary to guarantee safe flights,” the court ruled.
On August 2, 2023, Z Air filed a request with the SMCAA for Commercial Air Transport Operations by a Foreign Air Operator Certificate (FACOP) with the objective to obtain a permit for flying with five planes between Curacao and international destinations with a stop in St. Maarten. The Z Air planes are registered in the United States under a dry lease agreement. Under that agreement Z Air provides the flight crew and supervises the planes’ airworthiness.
The SMCAA nevertheless made the permit contingent on the coordination of safety oversight activities between the FAA and the Curacao Civil Aviation Authority (CCAA). It then granted a permit until December 31, 2024. A letter signed by the FAA was made a condition for extending the permit until April 30. 2025.
Z Air referred to the agreement of August 22, 2011, that regulates the liberalization of air traffic within the Kingdom of the Netherlands and maintained that it meets all the conditions described in this protocol. The court agreed that the protocol does not bar the government from setting additional conditions.
The court ruled that the government had insufficiently made clear and insufficiently substantiated that a letter signed by the FAA is necessary to guarantee the safety of flights. “Z Air has convincingly explained that the distribution of responsibilities between the states is already completely regulated by law.”
The government argued that the FAA is not capable of supervising the airworthiness of the planes because they operate outside of the United States and that the CCAA does not have the expertise to inspect the planes.
Z Air countered that it is held to maintain its planes based on an FAA-approved maintenance program.
The court ruled that the condition imposed by the SMCAA is unreasonable, “especially because the permits have been made dependent on this condition, while only the FAA and not Z air is capable to meet this requirement.”
The court therefore annulled the SMCAA-decision that contains the additional condition and ordered the government to pay for the costs of the court procedure.
###
ADVERTISEMENT
