Where an insurer relies on a policy condition requiring compliance with Air Navigation Regulations and alleges an unlicensed person was the pilot, the onus is on the insurer to establish that fact. A jury's finding that the insurer has not discharged that onus will not be set aside unless the finding is perverse or against the weight of evidence. Under s 54 of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth), the 'act' of authorising an unlicensed person to occupy the pilot's seat may be regarded as capable of causing or contributing to a loss even where that person was not found to be the pilot at the material time, if the authorisation indirectly contributed to the crash by affecting the conditions under which the actual pilot operated.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.