If this story is true then you’d certainly have to think twice before flying with this airline.
http://www.brisbanetimes.co...
Bare bones is that an Aussie Bloke was on a Tiger Airways flight,got up to let a female passenger get past him,was allegedly sworn at by another male passenger and retaliated and was subsequently arrested in Singapore. Regardless of whether or not he faces caning and 2 years imprisonment, the fact is that it’s an option that the authorities have available to them.Makes me wonder what the story would be with Etihad,for example.
Are we in effect subject to the specific laws which apply in the countries of ownership, regardless of the fact that the incident may well have occurred in international airspace?

Not subject to caning…not in custody…

http://www.abc.net.au/news/...

So it would appear;but to what extent is that a political decision?
My question remains,are we subject to the laws of the carrier’s country of origin regardless of where any such trifling “offence” may in fact take place?
Without an answer to that you’d have to be very,very careful about anything you may do,regardless of any provocation on a foreign airline.

I’m sure some of our other members can answer with greater authority.
As I understand the case law and precedent (my practical experience is with cruise ships but I understand the same principles apply) is that any offence committed on board is subject to the laws of either the port of last departure or the place of registration of the vessel.
“international space” actually has no meaning.
I have no idea of the overlay of ICAO regulation.

However, i am sure we will never know the full story.
Guy 1 bumps or trips over guy 2. Guy 2 tells him to f’k off and be more careful. Guy 1 tells him to pull his ‘kn head in and he was only trying to be polite.
Can’t imagine that all there was to it.
Prior incidents? Near fisticuffs? Alcohol enhanced reaction? Tell the hosties to go fk themselves?

Always the hidden story that we never get to know about.

This from an aviation lawyer as reported in the Border Mail’s website:

Aviation lawyer, Pat Noonan said the man was “very unlucky” to have been apprehended on January 3, for allegedly swearing in a verbal argument, while on the overnight flight to Singapore.
“What happened in this particular instance is that all three factors came into play,” Mr Noonan said.
Mr Noonan said that the law could be blurry when dealing with international flights and airspace, however there were certain conventions followed.
“The country of carrier applies their own laws while in international airspace. However if there is an incident in Australia, then Australian laws will apply to passengers that are off-loaded in Australia,” he said.
“You’ve got to be very, very careful. If the incident does occur in international skies on a foreign carrier, that country’s laws do apply.”
Incidents such as this would make travellers think twice about using foreign airlines, Mr Noonan said.

You’re a clever man NWABP. Them’s are the rules on cruise and merchant ships except where they have entered the assigned nautical limit of the next port (I think 300 naut mile) The ‘Crimes At Sea Act’, The ‘Admiralty Act’, plus a few others, combined in certain circumstances with the ‘Crimes Act’ State and Commonwealth can all have some effect. Obviously Naval ships of any country always remain as sovereign soil no matter where they are berthed.

Air space is somewhat different, but I think they still work off a distancal proximity by altitude and longitude to whichever country. The one thing that remains constant though I do believe and may be wrong, is that the country of origin of the ship/plane etc will always have sovereignty. ie, an american cruise ship, say ‘Carnival’ lines or the British P & O whilst docked in Sydney, they are still perceived as U.S. or British soil hence the need to pass through customs getting on or off. (Excluding day visitations of course) Have actually had people get onboard a P & O ship in Sydney and then claim political assylum under the Westminster System which both Aust and England use. Was very interesting,,,,,, There are some specific acts that deal with airline stuff, but I will ask a mate about the jurisdictional bit.

if you fly Tiger, check in on time, which is within the timeframes they set, for Domestic is 45minutes before departure. If you don’t, even within 47 minutes, they don’t let you on, and you forfeit your fare.

I thought this thread might be about Mr Woods recruiting some new girlfriends …..... seems I was wrong.