However, the tribunal accepted the opportunity to find the informant\u2019s identity might now be lost.<\/p>\n
The pilot, who at the time flew back and forth across the Tasman for Virgin Australia (NZ), says he suffered immense stress during the investigation by the New Zealand and Australian civil aviation authorities. Photo \/ 123rf<\/p>\n
The CAA said in a statement to NZME it acknowledged and accepted the tribunal\u2019s decision that it breached two principles of the Privacy Act<\/a> relating to the accuracy and completeness of information disclosed.<\/p>\n It also found that the CAA was entitled to disclose the safety concern to the relevant Australian aviation regulator because of the aviation safety obligations that applied at the time.<\/p>\n Milestone in years-long fight<\/p>\n The decision marks a milestone in the years-long fight by the pilot at the centre of what he described earlier as \u201cmalicious\u201d complaints that he was \u201cgetting drunk\u201d before a flight, and later, that he was seen at Brisbane Airport<\/a> emerging from a toilet with a woman.<\/p>\n The alleged incident at Brisbane Airport was communicated anonymously to Virgin Australia, which it believed was vexatious.<\/p>\n NZME reported in 2022<\/a> that the pilot was fighting to have the person who made the claim about him drinking identified so he could bring a defamation lawsuit against them, but the CAA would not name them, claiming it would be a breach of privacy.<\/p>\n The tribunal<\/a>, made up of specialist human rights lawyer Martha Coleman as deputy chairwoman, plus members Patsi Davies and Sandra Kai Fong, said the pilot\u2019s privacy had been breached through the CAA disclosing an allegation it received about him to another party, without taking reasonable steps to ensure the information was accurate, complete and not misleading.<\/p>\n The tribunal also found the CAA<\/a> had failed to provide him with all the personal information he was entitled to.<\/p>\n It must now provide him with unredacted versions of personal information from October 2017, plus an automated email sent to the informant immediately after the notice of concern was sent in August 2017.<\/p>\n False complaints caused \u2018immense stress\u2019<\/p>\n The pilot, who at the time flew back and forth across the Tasman for Virgin Australia (NZ), said the complaints, which were quickly found to be false, caused him immense stress during the investigation by the CAA and its Australian counterpart, the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority<\/a> (CASA).<\/p>\n He put himself on sick leave because he did not consider it safe for him to fly.<\/p>\n The investigation followed the CAA receiving an \u201caviation-related concern\u201d via an online portal in August 2017.<\/p>\n The portal allowed members of the public or those employed within the industry to report aviation-related safety concerns to the CAA. <\/p>\n The informant alleged he and his wife had seen a Virgin Australia pilot drinking alcohol in a Wellington hotel and, a short time later, when they arrived at the terminal, they saw the same pilot operating a flight from Wellington<\/a> to Brisbane. <\/p>\n The tribunal said the informant claimed the pilot was carrying a bag with his name on it.<\/p>\n The Australian aviation authority was notified and the next day the pilot was told information had been received from a member of the public that indicated he \u201cmay not meet the medical standards required for a pilot\u2019s licence because he was suffering from problematic use of alcohol\u201d. <\/p>\n He was then directed to undertake a medical examination.<\/p>\n The pilot claimed disclosure of the concern to the Australian authority breached his privacy rights, in that the CAA \u201cfailed to take reasonable steps to ensure that the information passed to CASA was complete, accurate and not misleading\u201d.<\/p>\n Pilot in dark about nature of allegation<\/p>\n The pilot told NZME in 2022 he wasn\u2019t given any information about when the incidents were supposed to have occurred and had to do his own research, even going so far as to source CCTV footage of the bar from the hotel.<\/p>\n That footage confirmed he had been at the bar to collect milk for his breakfast, and a geo-tracking app on his phone confirmed he was in a taxi on the way to the airport when, according to the complainant, he was \u201cgetting drunk at the bar\u201d.<\/p>\n The pilot said even though the investigation was kept confidential, even from his employer, \u201cChinese whispers got around very quickly\u201d.<\/p>\n \u201cRumours grew up around these allegations, many of my colleagues believed the allegations,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Gaps in disclosure<\/p>\nThe CAA says aviation safety concerns must be taken seriously and, where appropriate, shared with the regulator responsible for looking into them. Photo \/ 123rf<\/p>\n