UPDATED: David Henderson - Found guilty.

[lardy]

with a summary like that its pretty clear where the blame lies, in my opinion.

Blame doesn't need to be on one person.

If Ibbotson had survived and Sala died, Henderson would still take some responsibility.

[lennybluebird]

Was the verdict majority of unanimous?

[lardy]

not when flying an aircraft. Aviation Law is crystal clear about who is ultimately responsible - always PIC (Pilot in Command).

As said before, why don't BA just let anyone fly their planes?

[TWGL1]

And very sad to know that Sala thought the plane unfit, too.

Sickening really , R.I.P Emiliano Sala and thoughts are with Marina and family. Upsetting.

[Hilts]

Some justice for the Sala family.

[mrbluejay]

Majority according to the BBC report.

[Q]

Blame doesn't need to be on one person.

If Ibbotson had survived and Sala died, Henderson would still take some responsibility.

I agree

This case wasn’t about blaming Henderson solely for the deaths but showing his part in events

[Sunnysideup]

I agree Hilts
Justice at last for the Sala family!!

Does anyone know the penalty for “endangering an aircraft” and the probable sentence?

[TWGL1]

I agree Hilts
Justice at last for the Sala family!!

Does anyone know the penalty for “endangering an aircraft” and the probable sentence?

Maximum penalty 10 years

[lardy]

not when flying an aircraft. Aviation Law is crystal clear about who is ultimately responsible - always PIC (Pilot in Command).

Does this still apply if that pilot should not have been in the cockpit?

[IanD]

Sickening really , R.I.P Emiliano Sala and thoughts are with Marina and family. Upsetting.

We will never know how good he could have been as a City player. He might have been the player that kept us out of the mess we now find ourselves in.
RIP

[TWGL1]

https://www.pprune.org/accidents-clo...sland-110.html


From the pilots forum

[gabbsthenewt]

not when flying an aircraft. Aviation Law is crystal clear about who is ultimately responsible - always PIC (Pilot in Command).

I am inclined to believe you on account of you being Feedback and your obvious knowledge and experience in the field.
However given that Henderson was the organiser of the flights, the flights were in his name as pilot, and he was the one leasing it, and him demonstrated to be knowingly aware of DI's lack of qualifications - I find it hard to accept that Henderson wouldn't be vicariously liable.

I appreciate it may be the case, but these portions of relevant law pulled from reading around would give credence to that it Henderson does have blame laying firmly on him albeit him not being the pilot who ended up in the cockpit (even though he was the one down on the paperwork! (so for all intents and purposes I would argue was the pilot! - tenuous I appreciate - pilots may routinely have to change to any number of circs I would imagine)

Section 76 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 - If the aircraft is leased-out for a period of more than 14 days and the pilot is not an employee of the owner the liability is transferred to the individual/party to which the aircraft is demised (lessee by way of agreement).

Operators may be found guilty of corporate manslaughter or homicide pursuant to the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 where: (i) the way in which the carrier’s activities had been managed or organised caused a person’s death; (ii) the person’s death was the result of a gross breach of a relevant duty of care owed to that person by the carrier; and (iii) the way in which the senior management of the carrier managed or organised the carrier’s activities was a substantial element of the breach.

[Feedback]

As said before, why don't BA just let anyone fly their planes?

as an operator they have a duty of care to their customers. Believe it or not, it is not unheard of to find out a pilot has been flying for many years without the requisite ratings. Its extremely rare, but not unheard of. checks these days are far more stringent.

[IanD]

I am inclined to believe you on account of you being Feedback and your obvious knowledge and experience in the field.
However given that Henderson was the organiser of the flights, the flights were in his name as pilot, and he was the one leasing it, and him demonstrated to be knowingly aware of DI's lack of qualifications - I find it hard to accept that Henderson wouldn't be vicariously liable.

I appreciate it may be the case, but these portions of relevant law pulled from reading around would give credence to that it Henderson does have blame laying firmly on him albeit him not being the pilot who ended up in the cockpit (even though he was the one down on the paperwork! (so for all intents and purposes I would argue was the pilot! - tenuous I appreciate - pilots may routinely have to change to any number of circs I would imagine)

Section 76 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 - If the aircraft is leased-out for a period of more than 14 days and the pilot is not an employee of the owner the liability is transferred to the individual/party to which the aircraft is demised (lessee by way of agreement).

Operators may be found guilty of corporate manslaughter or homicide pursuant to the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 where: (i) the way in which the carrier’s activities had been managed or organised caused a person’s death; (ii) the person’s death was the result of a gross breach of a relevant duty of care owed to that person by the carrier; and (iii) the way in which the senior management of the carrier managed or organised the carrier’s activities was a substantial element of the breach.

Wasn't it McKay that organised the flight, employing Henderson, in the first instance? Therefore, isn't McKay "vicariously liable", too?

[lardy]

as an operator they have a duty of care to their customers. Believe it or not, it is not unheard of to find out a pilot has been flying for many years without the requisite ratings. Its extremely rare, but not unheard of. checks these days are far more stringent.

In short, if Henderson really had no responsibility and it was all Ibbotson as the pilot, then this case wouldn't even have got to court.

[TWGL1]

Wasn't it McKay that organised the flight, employing Henderson, in the first instance? Therefore, isn't McKay "vicariously liable", too?

Anybody know if Nantes (via McKay) was responsible for the flight ?

[Rjk]

Anybody know if Nantes (via McKay) was responsible for the flight ?

I guess it'll all come out in the end. I don't tihnk this had any real bearing on the topic of whether we have to pay the transfer fee or not though - even if Nantes arranged the flight

[IanD]

https://www.pprune.org/accidents-clo...sland-110.html


From the pilots forum

N reg aircraft...."self spannered". Ie less oversight and, potentially, less safe.

[IanD]

Anybody know if Nantes (via McKay) was responsible for the flight ?

McKay employed Henderson to get Sala to Cardiff in time for Sala to join his new teammates in training the next day. To add to the complications, McKays sons were on City's books at the time and soon disappeared from the club (Colchester for one of them, I think) after the plane went down. McKay was after his slice of the cake and wanted to make sure Sala's transfer went through. In that respect Nantes are right to want their transfer fee and aren't liable IMHO.

[Feedback]

In short, if Henderson really had no responsibility and it was all Ibbotson as the pilot, then this case wouldn't even have got to court.

I've not articulated myself at all well here, I'll admit that. The PIC is responsible for the aircraft from the moment the engine is turned on to the moment the engine is turned off. The aircraft operator also has a responsibility outside of that.

As a pilot, I just cannot understand Ibbotson's thinking in flying. He was ultimately responsible once the aircraft decided to depart.

[TWGL1]

I've not articulated myself at all well here, I'll admit that. The PIC is responsible for the aircraft from the moment the engine is turned on to the moment the engine is turned off. The aircraft operator also has a responsibility outside of that.

As a pilot, I just cannot understand Ibbotson's thinking in flying. He was ultimately responsible once the aircraft decided to depart.

He could have just waited until the following morning …he must have reasons to depart that fateful evening … …..the weather was atrocious

[Feedback]

He could have just waited until the following morning …he must have reasons to depart that fateful evening … …..the weather was atrocious

another poster has said that he had financial issues, so that's probably the reason.

[IanD]

another poster has said that he had financial issues, so that's probably the reason.

Indeed. He needed the cash from piloting the aircraft and, as a gas engineer, had a job on the following day which he wanted to get to.

[gabbsthenewt]

He could have just waited until the following morning …he must have reasons to depart that fateful evening … …..the weather was atrocious

I mean the obvious reading from it would be that he decided to fly believing he and the plane were capable of just about pulling off the flight. Clearly he didn't know well enough and shouldn't have been entrusted with the aircraft.