British Overseas Airways Corp. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

D.C. Circuit

British Overseas Airways Corp. v. Civil Aeronautics Board

304 F.2d 952

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJune 14, 1962

DocketNos. 16640, 16643, 16644, 16652

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 304 F.2d 952 (British Overseas Airways Corp. v. Civil Aeronautics Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

British Overseas Airways Corp. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 304 F.2d 952 (D.C. Cir. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

WRIGHT, Circuit Judge.

Section 1006(a) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, 49 U.S.C.A. § 1486(a), here relied on, does not authorize review by this court, now or later, of the proposed regulation in suit, since it is “[an] order in respect of * * * foreign air [953]*953carrier[s] subject to the approval of the President” under Section 801 of the Act, 49 U.S.C.A. § 1461. See Chicago & Southern Air Lines v. Waterman S. S. Corp., 333 U.S. 103, 68 S.Ct. 431, 92 L. Ed. 668, interpreting the identical provision of the Civil Aeronautics Act, § 1006(a), formerly 49 U.S.C.A. § 646. The prohibition cannot be circumvented by the expedient attempted here. This is not to say that there may not be a judicial remedy against administrative, or even Presidential, action beyond the scope of lawful authority, as defined by the Aviation Act. The petitions will accordingly be dismissed, without prejudice to independent proceedings in the District Court challenging the validity of the proposed regulation if and when promulgated.

Petitions dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WRIGHT, Circuit Judge.

Section 1006(a) of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, 49 U.S.C.A. § 1486(a), here relied on, does not authorize review by this court, now or later, of the proposed regulation in suit, since it is “[an] order in respect of * * * foreign air [953]*953carrier[s] subject to the approval of the President” under Section 801 of the Act, 49 U.S.C.A. § 1461. See Chicago & Southern Air Lines v. Waterman S. S. Corp., 333 U.S. 103, 68 S.Ct. 431, 92 L. Ed. 668, interpreting the identical provision of the Civil Aeronautics Act, § 1006(a), formerly 49 U.S.C.A. § 646. The prohibition cannot be circumvented by the expedient attempted here. This is not to say that there may not be a judicial remedy against administrative, or even Presidential, action beyond the scope of lawful authority, as defined by the Aviation Act. The petitions will accordingly be dismissed, without prejudice to independent proceedings in the District Court challenging the validity of the proposed regulation if and when promulgated.

Petitions dismissed.

Laker Airways Limited, a Foreign Corporation v. Sabena, Belgian World Airlines, a Foreign Corporation Klm, Royal Dutch Airlines, a Foreign Corporation, Laker Airways Limited, a Foreign Corporation v. Sabena, Belgian World Airlines, a Foreign Corporation, Klm, Royal Dutch Airlines, a Foreign Corporation

731 F.2d 909 (D.C. Circuit, 1984)

Laker Airways Ltd. v. Sabena, Belgian World Airlines

731 F.2d 909 (D.C. Circuit, 1984)

Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. Boyd

207 F. Supp. 152 (District of Columbia, 1962)

British Overseas Airways Corporation, British West Indian Airways, Limited, and Bahamas Airways, Limited v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Cunard Eagle Airways, Ltd., Intervenors. Scandinavian Airlines System v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Cunard Eagle Airways, Ltd., Intervenors. Societe Anonyme Belge D'Exploitation De La Navigation Aerienne (Sabena) v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Cunard Eagle Airways, Ltd., Intervenors. Klm Royal Dutch Airlines v. Civil Aeronautics Board, Cunard Eagle Airways, Ltd., Intervenors

304 F.2d 952 (D.C. Circuit, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 F.2d 952, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/british-overseas-airways-corp-v-civil-aeronautics-board-cadc-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack