Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Table of Abbreviations and Acronyms
- 1 What is International Aviation Law?
- 2 The Foundations of Public International Aviation Law
- 3 The International Law Regime for Trade in Air Services
- 4 The International Law Regime for Airline Investment and Global Alliances
- 5 The International Law Regime for Aviation Safety and Security
- 6 The International Law Regime for Aviation and the Environment
- 7 The International Law Regime for Air Carrier Liability and Surface Damage
- 8 The International Law Regime for Aircraft Financing and Aircraft Nationality
- Afterword
- Select Bibliography
- Table of Authorities
- Index
- References
3 - The International Law Regime for Trade in Air Services
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2014
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Table of Abbreviations and Acronyms
- 1 What is International Aviation Law?
- 2 The Foundations of Public International Aviation Law
- 3 The International Law Regime for Trade in Air Services
- 4 The International Law Regime for Airline Investment and Global Alliances
- 5 The International Law Regime for Aviation Safety and Security
- 6 The International Law Regime for Aviation and the Environment
- 7 The International Law Regime for Air Carrier Liability and Surface Damage
- 8 The International Law Regime for Aircraft Financing and Aircraft Nationality
- Afterword
- Select Bibliography
- Table of Authorities
- Index
- References
Summary
Parallel Frameworks:
As will now be clear, there are parallel frameworks that organize international air services. One is the product of the Chicago Convention and focuses primarily on setting the terms of international technical cooperation and harmonization. The other is a much more specific economic system that is based on bilateral exchange where two States negotiate an air services agreement (ASA) that grants each party’s airlines the privilege to carry passengers, cargo, or a combination of both to points to, from, over, or beyond their respective territories. These market access privileges (commonly referred to as “traffic rights”) have historically been subject to a number of protectionist conditions, including, inter alia, caps on the number of flights flown over a given time period (frequencies), predetermined limits on the amount of passengers and/or cargo carried (capacity), and rate of return (pricing or air fare) regulations.
The Nationality Rule
No restrictive condition has been more conspicuous than the pervasive requirement, stitched into virtually all ASAs, that an airline must be substantially owned (and often also effectively controlled) by its home State (or by the citizens of that State) before it is eligible to perform international air services under that State’s ASAs. Referred to by aviation lawyers as the “nationality rule,” the extraordinary consequence of that restriction is that the world’s airlines are effectively barred from fully accessing global equity markets, from establishing foreign subsidiaries, and from consummating cross-border mergers. As a result, there is no such thing as a true global airline, although Australia and New Zealand had aspirations to build such a Colossus at the Chicago conference in 1944. To borrow a slogan favored by the International Air Transport Association (IATA), the nationality rule prevents airlines “from doing business like any other business.” In a phrase, the industry that helped to globalize the world has not itself become globalized.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Principles and Practice of International Aviation Law , pp. 69 - 122Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2014
References
, Scope and Limits of Multilateral Approaches to International Air Transport, in OECD, International Air Transport: The Challenges Ahead75, 87 n.6 (1993)Google Scholar
, Beyond Open Skies: A New Regime for International Aviation 9 (2009).
, Towards a Transatlantic Common Aviation Area: AEA Policy Statement (1999).
, Air Services Agreements Projector (2010), .
, The Road to External Representation: The European Commission’s Activism in International Air Transport, 13 J. Eur. Pub. Pol’y52, 56 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, opened for signature Dec. 7, 1944, 61 Stat. 1180, 15 U.N.T.S. 295 (entered into force Apr. 4, 1947) [hereinafter Chicago Convention]
, Who Owns the Sky?: The Struggle To Control Airspace from the Wright Brothers On 48–50 (2008);
, opened for signature Dec. 7, 1944, 59 Stat. 1693, 84 U.N.T.S. 389 (entered into force Jan. 30, 1945) (129 State parties as of January 2013) [hereinafter Two Freedoms Agreement]
, opened for signature Dec. 7, 1944, 59 Stat. 1701, 171 U.N.T.S. 387 (entered into force Jan. 30, 1945) (11 State parties as of January 2013) [hereinafter Five Freedoms Agreement]
, The Law of International Air Transport 491 (1962).
See U.S. Airlines Fight For New Routes, Shanghai Daily, July 25, 2007,
, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, The EU’s External Aviation Policy: Addressing Future Challenges, COM (2012) 556 final (Sept. 27, 2012), at 13, 17 [hereinafter European Comm’n, External Aviation Policy]
& , Russia May Block EU Carriers from Siberian Overflight in Emissions Trading Battle, Aviation Daily, Feb. 23, 2012,
at 1, .Google Scholar
, The Role of Consultation in Bilateral International Air Services Agreements, as Exemplified by Bermuda I and Bermuda II, 19 Colum. J. Transnat’l L.183 (1981);Google Scholar
, Order in the Air and the Problem of Real and False Opinions, 4 Annals Air & Space L.93, 119 (1979).Google Scholar
, Deregulation and Globalization: Liberalizing International Trade in Services 53 (1988).
, Global Airlines: Competition in a Transnational Industry 87 (2d ed. 2002).
, Manual on the Regulation of International Air Transport 4.1-12 to 4.1-14, ICAO Doc. 9626 (2d ed. 2004)
, Rethinking the General Agreement on Trade in Services as a Pathway to Global Aviation Liberalization, 44(1) Irish Jurist95 (2009)Google Scholar
, FedEx, UPS Get a Toehold in China’s Express Delivery, Wall St. J., Sept. 11, 2012, at B1.
, Singapore’s New Air Services Agreements with the EU and the U.K.: Implications for Liberalization in Asia, 73 J. Air L. & Com.351, 362–64 (2008).Google Scholar
& , Restoring Global Aviation’s “Cosmopolitan Mentalité”, 29 B.U. Int’l L.J.1, 16 (2011).Google Scholar
, Rules of Origin in International Trade (2009).
, Verkehrsrecht und Verkehrspolitik als Europäische Aufgabe, in Europäische Verkehrspolitik1, 7 ( ed., 1987)Google Scholar
et al., Fettered Flight: Globalization and the Airline Industry (2000);
, The Economic Impact of Air Service Liberalization (2006);
& , Liberalization of Air Transport Services and Passenger Traffic (WTO Staff Working Paper ERSD-2008–06 Dec. 2008).
& , The Influence of Airline Ownership Rules on Aviation Policies and Carriers’ Strategies, in 5 Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies557, 557 tbl.1 (2005).Google Scholar
, The Law of Investment Treaties 196–204 (2010)
, Russia Threatens to Ban Austrian Airlines, Fin. Times, Mar. 1, 2010, at 1
Comm’n Decision 29/03/2005, Approving the Standard Clauses for Inclusion in Bilateral Air Service Agreements Between Member States and Third Countries Jointly Laid down by the Commission and the Member States, 2005 O.J. (C 943) 1.
, A Community Aviation Policy Towards Its Neighbours, COM (2004) 74 final (Feb. 9, 2004), para. 35.
, The Decision of the European Court of Justice on Open Skies – How Can We Take Liberalization to the Next Level?, 68 J. Air L. & Com.485, 504 (2003).Google Scholar
, Open Skies for Africa: Implementing the Yamoussoukro Decision 9–12 (2010).
, Ratemaking in International Air Transport: A Legal Analysis of International Air Fares and Rates 1 (1978);
, Public International Air Transportation Law in a New Era 153 (1976).
, Human Action: A Treatise on Economics 257–58 (4th ed. 1996)
, Arbitral Award in the Dispute between the Belgian and Irish Civil Aviation Authorities over Services between Brussels and Dublin by Sabena and Aer Lingus, given at Dublin July 17, 1981, 8 Air L.50 (1983))Google Scholar
, The U.S.-U.K. Arbitration Concerning Heathrow Airport User Charges, 89 Am. J. Int’l L.174 (1995)).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, The Use of Precedent by International Judges and Arbitrators, 2 J. Int. Disp. Settlement5 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Policy and Guidance Material on the Economic Regulation of International Air Transport, ICAO Doc. 9587 (3rd ed. 2008).
, Annex on Air Transport Services, Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 1B, Legal Instruments – Results of the Uruguay Round, opened for signature Apr. 15, 1994, 1869 U.N.T.S. 183, 33 I.L.M. 1125, 1167 (1993).
, Regulation of International Air Transport Services, Report by the Council on Trade in Services, at 2, A33-WP/7 (Jun. 6, 2001)
, Trade in Air Transport Services: Emerging Trends, 35 J. World Trade1133, 1145 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Mixed Signals on Foreign Ownership: An Assessment, Issues Aviation L. & Pol’y (CCH) ¶ 25,341, at 13,125 (2005)Google Scholar
, opened for signature May 1, 2001, 2215 U.N.T.S. 33, reprinted in 3 Av. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶26,018, at 21,121 (Nov. 15, 2000) [hereinafter MALIAT]
& , Outcasting: Enforcement in Domestic and International Law, 121 Yale L.J.252 (2011).Google Scholar
, New Zealand May Beat Australia to an Open EU Aviation Agreement, N.Z. Herald, Aug. 24, 2009, .
, Transport: There’s Only Room for One Hub, Says Heathrow, The Guardian, Nov. 15, 2012,at 34
Heathrow: Government to Study Airport Expansion Plans, BBC News, Sept. 5, 2012, .
& , Reforming Civil Aviation Regulation in the United Kingdom: The Civil Aviation Bill 2011–12, 11 Issues Aviation L. & Pol’y321 (2012).Google Scholar
, Price vs. Quantity-Based Approaches to Airport Congestion Management, 93 J. Pub. Econ.681 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Q with Former State Department Official John Byerly, Bus. Travel News, Nov. 10, 2010, (describing the U.S.-Japan agreement as “sort of a miracle agreement”).
, International Trade: Trade Remedies, in Research Handbook of International Economic Law62, 106 (2007).Google Scholar
, Embassies with Wings, FT.com, Feb. 24, 2012
, Competition Policies for an Integrated World Economy (1994);
, Global Governance, Antitrust, and the Limits of International Cooperation, 38 Cornell Int’l L.J.173 (2005);Google Scholar
, The Impossible Dream: Real International Antitrust, 1992 U. Chi. Legal F.277 (1992).Google Scholar