Relaxation of Drone Regulation in Australia
Tuesday 4 October 2016 @ 1.46 p.m. | Legal Research
On 29 September 2016, changes to the regulation of "remote piloted aircraft systems", brought about by the provisions of the Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Part 101) Regulation 2016 [CTH] (the Regulations), came into effect, leading to increased privacy concerns and collision concerns from those in the industry.
Background to the Regulations
As mentioned in our previous TimeBase article, the Regulations amend the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (Cth), Civil Aviation (Fees) Regulations 1995 (Cth), Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (Cth) and Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 (Cth) to align with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) terminology and key outcomes introduced by the Regulations include simplified regulatory requirements for lower risk RPA operations and an allowance for more detailed operational matters to be dealt with in a Manual of Standards, providing greater flexibility and responsiveness in a rapidly evolving area.
More specifically, the Regulations establish a set of standard operating conditions for RPA, categorisations for RPA according to weight or, in the case of airships, envelope capacity, and introduces the concept of 'excluded RPA' to represent RPA operations considered to be lower risk, as determined by RPA category and operational use. Excluded RPA have reduced regulatory requirements, such as not needing an operator's certificate or a remote pilot licence.
The Regulations also permit private landowners to carry out some commercial-like operations on their own land under the 'standard RPA operating conditions' without requiring them to hold an Unmanned Aircraft Operator's Certificate, if using an RPA weighing up to 25 kg provided that none of the parties involved receive remuneration. For RPA weighing between 25 kg to 150 kg, the operator needs to hold a remote pilot licence in the category of aircraft being flown.
Warnings from Lawyers and Specialists in Industry
There have been mixed reactions from the public, from lawyers and from specialists in the industry.
Aviation special counsel for Maurice Blackburn Lawyers, Joseph Wheeler, in an ABC News Article, said the move towards deregulation would significantly increase the risk of a crash between a drone and a plane or a helicopter. He called on the Senate to disallow the legislation at its next sitting and flagged a possible High Court appeal if the laws were not amended:
"If we had greater safeguards to enforce the regulations when things go wrong, that would go a long way towards ensuring with the injuries that inevitably would happen, the ability for people on the ground who are injured to access compensation."
Australian Federation of Air Pilots president David Booth said rogue drones flying near Australia's airports were a growing concern:
Civil Aviation Safety Authority spokesman Peter Gibson said there was a system in place to mitigate the risks:
"We looked at the risks from the various size of drones and we worked out that the safety risks of these very small drones can be managed through a set of standard operating conditions, a notification system and by marking the drones with an identification number."
Privacy Concerns
According to Piper Alderman partner, James Lawrence, privacy is a continuing legal concern. In a recent Lawyers Weekly article, he stated:
“There is a concern around privacy and intrusion. Of course, in Australia we do not have a tort of intrusion of privacy. We have the Commonwealth Privacy Act, but that generally regulates the collection and use of personal information.
There is a gap, in some people’s minds, around protection of privacy. In fact, the Australian Law Reform Commission recently recommended that Australia embrace a Commonwealth, legislative right of privacy. As yet, that has not been acted on.”
TimeBase is an independent, privately owned Australian legal publisher specialising in the online delivery of accurate, comprehensive and innovative legislation research tools including LawOne and unique Point-in-Time Products.
Sources:
Civil Aviation Legislation Amendment (Part 101) Regulation 2016 [CTH] and explanatory statement as reproduced on TimeBase LawOne
