Advertisement

Rights in Aircraft

Chapter
  • 79 Downloads

Abstract

There is no doubt that aircraft are movable property. But the regulations which are applicable to movable property do not all apply to aircraft. In spite of aircraft being movable property, their legal status differs in many respects from that of ordinary movables. As explained in the previous chapter, aircraft possess a nationality, and consequently each State has to keep a public register for the registration of aircraft. The fact of being entered on this register determines the nationality of the aircraft. That is laid down in public international law (Chicago Convention of 1944). Practically all of the States engaged in aviation have therefore recognized this exceptional status of aircraft as movable property.

Keywords

Spare Part Geneva Convention International Recognition International Civil Aviation Organization Draft Convention 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Convention on the International Recognition of Rights in Aircraft, Geneva, June 18, 1948.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    U.S.A., Pakistan, Brazil, Norway, Sweden and Chile (without reservations); Mexico (with reservation).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shawcross and Beaumont, “Air Law”, p. 14; McNair, “Law of the Air,” p. 107; Lemoine, “Traité de Droit Aérien”, p. 174; Cooper, “A study of the Legal Status of Aircraft”, 1949, p. 56.Google Scholar
  4. 1.
    Translation from Revue Française de Droit Aérien, 1949, 1–4.Google Scholar
  5. 1.
    Shawcross and Beaumont, “Air Law”, p. 467.Google Scholar
  6. 2.
    Ibid., p. 14Google Scholar
  7. 1.
    Spaight, “Aircraft in Peace and the Law”. McNair, “Law of the Air”.Google Scholar
  8. 1.
    Convention for the unification of certain rules relating tot the precautionary arrest of aircraft)Rome, May 29, 1933).Google Scholar
  9. 1.
    Convention for the unification of certain rules relating to international carriage by air (Warsaw Convention of October 12, 1929).Google Scholar
  10. 2.
    Convention for the unification of certain rules relating to damage caused by aircraft to third parties on the surface (Rome Convention of May 29, 1933). Convention for the unification of certain rules relating to the precautionary arrest of aircraft (Rome, May 29, 1933). Convention on assistance and salvage of aircraft at sea (Brussels, 1938).Google Scholar
  11. 1.
    CITEJA is discussed in : Lemoine, “Traité de Droit Aérien,” pp. 48–50. Riese, “Luftrecht”, pp. 34, 36 and 51. Smirnoff, “Le CITEJA”, Paris, 1936. Sudre, “Le CITEJA”, R.G.A., 1946.Google Scholar
  12. 2.
    CITEJA, Session of May 1929.Google Scholar
  13. 3.
    CITEJA, Doc. Nos. 32 and 50.Google Scholar
  14. 1.
    CITEJA, Doc. No. 162.Google Scholar
  15. 2.
    CITEJA, Doc. No. 108, September 1931.Google Scholar
  16. 1.
    CITEJA, Doc. No. 128, October 1931.Google Scholar
  17. 2.
  18. 3.
    CITEJA, Doc. No. 162.Google Scholar
  19. 1.
    CITEJA Doc. No. 128.Google Scholar
  20. 8.
    Convention concernant l’immatriculation des bateaux de navigation intérieure de 9 décembre 1930; ratified by the Netherlands, Act. of June 24, 1939.Google Scholar
  21. 1.
    CITEJA Doc. No. 50, October 1930.Google Scholar
  22. 2.
    Ibid., p. 117.Google Scholar
  23. 3.
    CITEJA Doc. No. 128.Google Scholar
  24. 4.
    CITEJA Doc. No. 162.Google Scholar
  25. 5.
  26. 1.
    Ratified by the Netherlands on April 28, 1938; the provisions were incorporated into Dutch legislation as Art. 770 (h-k) of the Code of Civil Procedure.Google Scholar
  27. 2.
    Convention on the International Recognition of Rights in Aircraft, Geneva, June 18, 1948.Google Scholar
  28. 1.
    Lemoine, “Traité de Droit Aérien”, p. 179.Google Scholar
  29. 2.
    Le Goff, “Traité théorique et pratique de Droit Aérien”, p. 521.Google Scholar
  30. 3.
    Lemoine, “Traité de Droit Aérien”, p. 181. Planiol et Ripert, “Traité Pratique de Droit Civil Français”, III, p. 687.Google Scholar
  31. 1.
    Lemoine, “Traité de Droit Aérien,” p. 182 .Google Scholar
  32. 2.
    Planiol et Rippert, “Traité Pratique de Droit Civil Français”, III, p. 687. Ripert, “Droit Maritime”, I, p. 424. Lemoine, “Traité de Droit Aérien, “ p. 182.Google Scholar
  33. 3.
    French translation published in Revue Française de Droit Aérien, No. 2, April-June 1949.Google Scholar
  34. 1.
    Gay de Montella, “La personalité de l’aéronef et la publicité aéronautique en droit espagnol”, Revue Française de Droit Aérien, No. 2, April-June 1949, p. 137.Google Scholar
  35. 1.
    Shawcross and Beaumont “Air Law”, p. 467. 2 Amended in 1942, 1947 and 1948.Google Scholar
  36. 1.
    Taylor, “A practical Reconciliation of State and Federal Control” 12 Journal of Air Law and Commerce 232, 1941. 2 See page 70.Google Scholar
  37. 1.
    CITEJA Doc. Nos. 50 and 162.Google Scholar
  38. 2.
    CITEJA Doc. No. 73.Google Scholar
  39. 3.
    ICAO Doc. 4635-L.C./71, Sept. 5, 1947.Google Scholar
  40. 1.
    ICAO Doc. 5722.Google Scholar
  41. 2.
    The Convention was signed by 27 States, including the Netherlands; so far it has been ratified by the U.S.A., Pakistan, Brazil, Norway, Sweden and Chile (without reservations), and by Mexixo (with reservation).Google Scholar
  42. 3.
    CITEJA Doc. 468.Google Scholar
  43. 1.
    Wilberforce, “The international recognition of rights in aircraft”, International Law Quarterly, 1948.Google Scholar
  44. 2.
    Arminjon: “Précis de droit international privé”, Paris, 1934.Google Scholar
  45. 2a.
    Niboyet: “Traité de droit international privé français”, 6 vol. Paris T.V.: La territorialité, 1947.Google Scholar
  46. 2b.
    Coquoz: “Les perspectives d’avenir du droit privé international aérien”, 1938 pp. 29–33.Google Scholar
  47. 2c.
    Wolff: “Das Internationale Privatrecht Deutschlands”, Göttingen-Heidelberg, 1949, p. 149.Google Scholar
  48. 3.
    De Visscher: “Les Conflicts de Lois en matière de Droit Aérine”, Académie de Droit International, Recueil des Cours 1934, p. 305.Google Scholar
  49. 3a.
    Milch: “Die Luftfahrzeughypothek,” Berlin, 1930, p. 45.Google Scholar
  50. 3b.
    Calkins: “Creation and International Recognition of Title and Security Rights in Aircraft”, Journal of Air Law and Commerce, 1948, p. 160.Google Scholar
  51. 1.
    Wilberforce, “The international recognition of rights in aircraft”, International Law Quarterly, 1948.Google Scholar
  52. 1.
    Rijks, “Het Verdrag van Genève”, 1952, p. 112.Google Scholar
  53. 2.
    Hofstetter, “L’hypothèque aérienne”, Lausanne, 1950, p. 222.Google Scholar
  54. 1.
    ICAO Doc. 5722, p. 231. 2 ICAO Doc. 5722, p. 136.Google Scholar
  55. 1.
    Riese, “Luftrecht”, pp. 295 and 296.Google Scholar
  56. 1.
    These provisions are in accordance with Article 29 of the Convention de Genève concernant l’immatriculation des bateaux de navigation intérieure, les droits réels sur ces bateaux et autres matières connexes, du 9 décembre 1930.Google Scholar
  57. 1.
    ICAO Doc. 4635, p. 110. ICAO Doc. 5722, p. 136.Google Scholar
  58. 1.
    Convention on damage caused by foreign aircraft to third parties on the surface (Rome, October 1952).Google Scholar
  59. 2.
    Hofstetter, “L’hypothèque aérienne”, p. 253.Google Scholar
  60. 1.
    Riese, “Luftrecht”, p. 304. Hofstetter, “L’hypothèque aérienne”, p. 262. Rijks, “Het Verdrag van Genève”, p. 178.Google Scholar
  61. 2.
    Convention de Bruxelles pour l’unification de certaines règles relatives aux privilèges et hypothèques maritimes, du 10 avril 1926. Convention de Genève concernant l’immatriculation des bateaux de navigation intérieure, les droits réels sur ces bateaux et autres matières connexes, du 9 dècembre 1930.Google Scholar
  62. 1.
    Lemoine, “Traité de Droit Aérien”, p. 183. Le Goff, “Traité théorique et pratique de Droit Aérien”, Paris 1934, p. 526.Google Scholar
  63. 1.
    Coquoz, “L’hypothèque aérienne”, Rev. Gen. de l’Air, 1938, p. 570. Riese, “Luftrecht”, p. 267.Google Scholar
  64. 1a.
    Guldiman, “Dingliche Rechte, besonders Pfandrechte, an Flugzeugen”, Schweizerische Juristen Zeitung , 1948, p. 372.Google Scholar
  65. 2.
    See French translation in R.F.D.A. 1949, Nos. 1–4.Google Scholar
  66. 1.
    Hofstetter, “L’hypothèque aérienne”, p. 124. Rijks, “Het Verdrag van Genève”, p. 54.Google Scholar
  67. 1.
    Egypt, Canada.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 1956

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations