Page 15 - Volume 12 Number 2

a pilot might rely on called “reasonable reliance.” An example of reasonable reliance would be a non-owner pilot renting an aircraft from a flight school, but the aircraft has an Airworthiness Directive that has not been complied with. Even the heavy-handed FAA would not expect a renter pilot to research the maintenance logbooks for AD compliance before every flight. However, if two rated pilots are participating in any aspect of the flight, and if a mishap occurs, expect the FAA to hold both pilots responsible for the adverse consequences.
Further complicating this discussion, most civil courts allow for comparative negligence determinations. For liability purposes, one pilot could be held 90 percent liable, and the other 10 percent liable, regardless of the FAA’s determination as to who is, or is not, PIC. If you are the 10 percent pilot with deeper pockets (or insurance), expect to become the recovery target.
Final recommendations: whenever possible, establish who is PIC before the door closes. If both will share PIC duties, verbalize “I am now PIC,” to the other pilot to reduce the likelihood of confusion, and to further promote good crew resource management. KA
Scott Williams, Esq. represents buyers and sellers
in aircraft transactions, and provides FAA certificate enforcement defense to all pilots. He is a panel attorney for AOPA’s Pilot Protection Services.
FEBRUARY 2018
KING AIR MAGAZINE • 13