CTA and court judgement

nurseawful



Joined: 06/02/2009
Posts: 5934

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 08:38

Has anyone heard anything at all on how CTA got on in the courts this week to try and get direct flights?

Geoff1131MK11


Joined: 04/04/2009
Posts: 396

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 08:41

I think the judgement is due to be given today.

zcacmxi


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 12:15

Yesterday was the last day of the hearing, and the judgement is not expected immediately.



At the case yesterday, a professor from Oxford University explained the similarity between the TRNC & Taiwan. Both are unrecognised states, where Taiwan is officially seen as part of China. However, non recognition is not an obstacle to direct flights to Taiwan. There are direct flights to Taiwan from a number of US & European cities.



The Judge stated this is an important case, and he would not be able to make a decision in 2 or 3 days...



We must now wait, fingers crossed!

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 12:54

Is there a time limit for Judges to summarise and make a decision?

Troodo


Joined: 12/06/2008
Posts: 1002

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 12:59

Will they take a positive verdict to the EU courts?



Troodo.

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 13:08

I would be interested to know the similarities and differences between TRNC and Taiwan and how that applies to direct flights, etc.

mmmmmmmmm?

clarets



Joined: 08/01/2009
Posts: 752

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 13:15

Msg 4....the time it takes to make the decision is usually inversely related to its importance,and to what degree dementia/syphilis has progressed throughout their central nervous system!

Anthony


Joined: 26/01/2009
Posts: 87

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 13:32

It's quite astonishing isn't it how incredibly ignorant the lower orders can be.

TRNCVaughan


Joined: 27/04/2008
Posts: 4578

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 14:10

Stop sucking-up to the Establishment Anthony, your knighthood is a dream.

ces88


Joined: 23/10/2007
Posts: 170

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 14:19

fingers crossed... hopefully they will use Taiwan flights as a sort of precedent??

Nunu1


Joined: 31/03/2008
Posts: 536

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 14:33

Just think what a boost it would give North Cyprus!!!!!!



It needs it after the negative and long drawn out Orams case.



Direct flights would boost the economy in sevaral ways, Tourism, Property market and sales. Import exports and of course the airline industry!



As usual the GC's would get all bent out of shape, I wonder if if there is anybody fro IATA on this board that could actually answer the question with facts. I thought All air travel slots and routes were controlled from Montreal Quebec Canada?



nunu1

elko2



Joined: 24/07/2007
Posts: 4400

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 16:04

I know for a fact that the air control centre in Brussels do cooperate with Ercan and send them the flight schedules on a regular basis. This is a sensible thing to do because air security is at stake.



For many years in the past Taiwan was internationally recognized and was even the permanent member of the Security Council. Then suddenly the Americans changed heart and the mainland China became recognized and as part of the agreement Taiwan became the unrecognized state i.e. Mainland China and Taiwan changed places but flights to both countries continued.



China and Taiwan are almost at war with each other and yet almost all the production has shifted from Taiwan to mainland China. So today, Taiwan and Hong Kong are marketting centres only and they get the cream of the commerce but production takes place in China.The Chineese are far more sensible than the Cypriots.



I expect the court to give judgement in favour of TRNC. The GCs will appeal to COA but I am not aware of any other authority to overturn the British judgement. Then it will be up to UK government to allow non-stop flights to TRNC but they have no legal obligation to do so.

ismet

Ste65


Joined: 23/03/2009
Posts: 106

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 16:15

So in a nutshell whatever the verdict from the judge do do still think the spineless british government will still refuse to allow direct flihts regardless?



No backbone Britain now. Not like the old days, we wouldnt stand a chance now if there was a major war in Western Europe, all the wimps in Britain now would wave their white flags. No balls the Brits now, almost like the Italians, they'll be installed reverse gear in the British army's tanks next.



What happened to the saying about the Union Jack and "These colours don't run"



Makes me ashamed to be British, mind you what do you expect with a poxy Jock in charge

zcacmxi


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 16:18

I think the case was based on official recognition of a country not being a prerequisite for direct flights. The example of Taiwan was given, and there are probably others too.



Taiwan is an unrecognised state, like the TRNC.

China (PRC) claim that they control Taiwan, like the Republic of Cyprus claims they control TRNC.



The non-recognition of Taiwan however, has not stopped its economic development, as it has not been under international embargo.



TRNC however, as well as being unrecognised has been under official/unofficial international embargo. Once the embargo on TRNC ends, it too will prosper. Hopefully the unjust and illegal "direct flights" embargo imposed by the UK government will end soon.

tommy13


Joined: 29/04/2009
Posts: 979

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 16:33

is there no news yet about this ??

dodger



Joined: 29/07/2007
Posts: 1895

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 16:36

Tommy,

Will take a while yet i would think,

Paul.

tommy13


Joined: 29/04/2009
Posts: 979

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 16:40

ok , so no results expected today , right ?

davedee



Joined: 01/12/2008
Posts: 479

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 17:29

Message 13 agreed

MarkVPiazza


Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 530

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 17:44

If this case was so straightforward, why wasn't it raised in court 30 years ago?



The Chicago Convention, the rules that govern air traffic, state that only a recognised government can nominate an international airport. This ruling transcends any UK ruling as far as I can see.



Mark

decanddyl


Joined: 17/01/2009
Posts: 792

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 17:46

re msg 13 POXY JOCK it was you and the likes of you who voted him in and being Scottish has absolutely nothing to do with it. Britain will always have a backbone as long as we have our armed forces with regiments from throughout Britain including Scotland. No wonder there are wars it starts with name calling

deecyprus4


Joined: 27/07/2008
Posts: 3452

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 18:01

Clarets...another classic from you...keep 'em coming

Coachie



Joined: 29/07/2008
Posts: 2135

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 18:07

I voted him in and I will vote for him again,better than some smirking young cockeyed who thinks he is gods answer to the people of GREAT BRITAIN.



STE65.And what position would you take along with the rest of us spineless Brits,no doubt in the tank that they have just put reverse gear in!!!! I think it is about time you emigrated young man,dont need people like you in our country,Go fight the Taliban and leave us whimps alone...

zcacmxi


Joined: 30/11/2008
Posts: 388

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 18:25

As with all laws/regulations/conventions, european governments only apply/enforce them when it suits them. They are very two faced, expecially where Turkey is involved.



It does not suit them to apply the rules to Taiwan as they want to import lots of cheaply manufactured goods. When it comes to Turkey/North Cyprus, they pull out the rule book...



Is it not the case that the Cyprus Problem is being used by the EU as an obstacle to Turkish EU membership? However, when it came to Cyprus it was not a problem even thought they voted NO to annan, and more importantly the accession of Cyprus into the European Union constituted an infringement of international law.



According to article 1 of the Treaty of Guarantee, the ROC should not participate in any political or economic union with any State which the Guarantor powers (Turkey, Greece, UK) are not also a member of. However, they happily ignored this.



When it comes to anything that benefits the Turkish Cypriots, the rule book comes

Ste65


Joined: 23/03/2009
Posts: 106

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 18:39

Actually I was in the Royal Navy and I'm a Falklands War veteran.



That was back in the day when we had the balls to go to the other side of the world and fight a war and win it against the odds. Not like the modern day turkey shoot in the middle east.



Plus we had a Prime Minister with balls too who stood up for Britain and never let anyone take the piss out of Britain.



Not like this poxy one eyed jock in now

decanddyl


Joined: 17/01/2009
Posts: 792

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 19:14

Tell me what has being a Jock !!! got to do with it

If you are 44 you must have been one of if not the youngest serviceman in the task force, which ship did you serve on?

Ste65


Joined: 23/03/2009
Posts: 106

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 20:40

Hms argonaut a Leander class frigate. I was one of the youngest yes.

decanddyl


Joined: 17/01/2009
Posts: 792

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 20:44

If so were you still only 17 when the TF left for the Falklands, if so you were sent there illegally

Ste65


Joined: 23/03/2009
Posts: 106

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 21:12

No you are wrong, lots of 17 year olds sailed for the falklands war.



In fact one lad on the Argonaut called Matthew Stuart was killed just after his 18th birthday when the ship got bombed. The bomb never exploded but it ruptured the fwd diesel tanks which flooded the fwd magazine where Matthew Stuart was on his off watch action station. He drowned in diesel. I joined the Argonaut aged 17 in March 1982, we sailed a few weeks later for the Falklands. I left the Argonaut in 1983, joined HmS Cleopatra in 1984 then went to a shore base for a while then joined HMS Nottingham, HMS York and finally finished off on HMS Edinburgh. I did Outback 88 deployment on HMS Edinburgh and left the mob in 1990.



Any more questions?

Ste65


Joined: 23/03/2009
Posts: 106

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 21:35

Hms argonaut a Leander class frigate. I was one of the youngest yes.

THOMAS


Joined: 27/01/2008
Posts: 28

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 21:37

nice one

decanddyl


Joined: 17/01/2009
Posts: 792

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 21:39

You were deployed illegally as MOD Directives at that time stated that no service personnel under the age of 18 should be sent to any conflict,this came out in the 70's when it was discovered "boy" soldiers were being sent to NI (boy soldiers classed as those under thae age of 18) and as far as I am aware these rules have not been relaxed since.

Ste65


Joined: 23/03/2009
Posts: 106

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 21:44

Not sure what books you are reading but if you look at the facts there were some lads who had turned 17 when we were down there. They were actually 16 when we sailed



One lad on the invincible was 16

The-Wicks


Joined: 27/05/2007
Posts: 2279

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 21:45

How the hell has a thread which started about CTA and direct flight end up as questioning someone's military career?



And I thought I was a bit off the wall.



J

waddo


Joined: 29/11/2008
Posts: 1966

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 21:48

As a "boy" I went to Cyprus in 65 and then on to Aden as well - the MoD tend to turn a Nelson eye in the hopes that nobody will find out! Guess they were happy when I got to Borneo at 18 years old, they were then legal again.



Know/knew lots of guys who went overseas to "Police Actions" when they were 17 and a month or two or six and nobody gave a stuff about them. Could never see what the problem was anyway, in those days if you joined up you did not do it so you could sit at home by the fire no matter what age you were - what has the 18 rule got to do with things then and now?

The-Wicks


Joined: 27/05/2007
Posts: 2279

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 21:53

waddo - well said!

J

Coachie



Joined: 29/07/2008
Posts: 2135

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 21:58

Ste65..And she did not have balls either,big mouth yes, balls no..Well i served in the RAF long before you were born,and was involved in the Nuclear stand off with Mr Kruschev. We were based i CYPRUS,ready to attack the Soviet Union,but luckily it did not come to that. At 17 I doubt that new new much about why it was happening,probably crapping yourself at the time no doubt,and I have to admit I would probably too.I was none too happy about the situation we were in when we sitting there loaded with nuclear bombs waiting for the balloon to go up.. As for you your love of the "tin Lady" say know more.She took the piss out of Britain long before Gordon Brown.That is another argument,but we leave it at that. You well may be a Falklands Veteran but that does not give you the right to insult any other veterans on this forum or indeed any current serving member ot the Armed Services.

If there was ever a useless war and needless loss of life that was one.No use to any one whatsoever...

THOMAS


Joined: 27/01/2008
Posts: 28

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 22:06

Ste i suspect your "love" for Maggie comes from your time in the forces (a record i respect you for) however i cannot share that love after the way she so nearly destroyed our home town.

decanddyl


Joined: 17/01/2009
Posts: 792

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 22:08

I gained my experience and knowledge through a military career not from any books apart from Queens Regs and MML. It was illegal to send anyone under the age of 18 to a conflict area from the mid 70's so therefore I was not saying it has always been the case, i.e. conscription and then throughtout the late 60's and upto 1972.

Since 2002 there has been an international agreement that nobody from any armed forces should be sent to a conflict area. I agree with Coachie about you insulting other veterans and current members of the Armed Services. Message ends.

AlsancakJack



Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 5762

Message Posted:
22/05/2009 22:27

This thread is now closed. Reason: Thread went off topic.