曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
have their ordinary legal meanings.
31. Naturally, the Regulations use many technical terms. A term of which the
meaning is well known within aviation and generally accepted is usually not defined. If
an unfamiliar word or term occurs in the Regulations, it may be defined in a general
dictionary. For example, chord, empennage, fuselage, and longeron are all defined in
the Macquarie Dictionary.
32. Occasionally a term that is in general use may be defined because the general
meaning of the term is not sufficiently precise. For example, although everybody knows
what ‘take-off’ means, it may be necessary, in a particular case, to treat taxiing as part of
a take-off. It is not certain whether the ordinary meaning of ‘take-off’ includes taxiing
or not. In cases like this there will be a definition in the Regulations.
33. Definitions may be either in the Dictionary at the end or in the text of the Parts.
34. A few terms that are used in the Regulations and that are not defined either in the
Regulations or in standard dictionaries are discussed in the Note on Terms at the end of
this Guide.
35. Although the Dictionary is not called a Part of the Regulations, and is not
numbered, it is as much part of the Regulations as any of the numbered Parts.
36. If a definition that applies throughout the Regulations is in the Regulations but
not in the Dictionary, there is a ‘signpost’ in the Dictionary to the regulation where the
definition is. For example:
major change, for a type design — see regulation 21.93.
37. The standard definitions of aviation terms are those laid down by ICAO and
published by it in International Civil Aviation Vocabulary (ICAO Document 9713).
Generally, terms defined by ICAO are used in the Regulations with the meaning given
by ICAO. There may still be a definition in the Regulations, but the definition will
usually be followed by a note to the effect that the source of the definition is the ICAO
definition. (The ICAO definition will either be used unchanged, or rewritten in minor
ways to be clearer and easier to read.) Often, where a term defined in the Regulations is
used, there will be a note nearby saying where to look for the definition.
38. See Subpart 1.A for general provisions about interpretation and definitions.
Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR)
CASR — 1st Edition – January 2003 Office of Legal Counsel
Replacement Page Amdt No. 11 — December 2004 Civil Aviation Safety Authority
Guide — 7
Offences
39. In Commonwealth legislative usage, offence means conduct that is prohibited
subject to a penalty (either a fine or imprisonment). If the sanction for conduct is the
withdrawal of a privilege (for example, cancellation of a licence) that conduct is not an
offence in this sense.
40. Many offences created by the Regulations are offences of strict liability. This is
given meaning by section 6.1 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, which is the
Schedule to the Commonwealth Criminal Code Act 1995.
41. The following brief explanation of section 6.1 of the Code is not by any means
the full story. The whole of Chapter 2 (General principles of criminal responsibility) of
the Code should be read if you need a fuller understanding.
42. For somebody to have committed an offence, he or she must at least have done
(or not done) an act. He or she may also have had to have a particular mental state about
the act — that is, he or she must have done the act intentionally, recklessly, or
negligently. For some offences the mental state is part of the definition of the offence,
as in ‘wilful murder’ — wilful in this case meaning intentional. In such cases the
prosecution must prove that the accused person both did the act and had the necessary
mental state. For offences of strict liability, however, no mental state forms part of the
definition of the offence, and the prosecution need not prove that the act was done
intentionally, negligently or recklessly, but only that it was done by the person accused.
43. Strict liability has nothing to do with the seriousness of an offence — in fact, the
less serious an offence is, the more likely it is to be one of strict liability.
44. Strict liability also does not take away any defences that would otherwise be
available — in fact, before it became necessary to state that an offence was strict
liability, if the defence of ‘reasonable excuse’ was available for the offence, the courts
regarded that fact as an indication that the offence was intended to be one of strict
liability.
45. Strict liability also does not mean that an assertion by the prosecutor is enough to
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
澳大利亚CASR Civil Aviation Safety Regulations下(45)
