In case you haven’t already heard, Qatar Airways is suing Airbus for alleged flaws in
the Airbus A350's airframe surface. Following the airline's concerns regarding the airworthiness of
the aircraft, the Qatar Civil Aviation Authority grounded a number of Qatar Airways' Airbus 350s.
However, EASA’s position on the airworthiness of the aircraft is that they’re safe to fly.
The latest development sees Qatar Airways alleging that Airbus has
been trying to leverage its influence over EASA regarding the accusations
put forward by the Qatari airline about the airworthiness of the A350.
The airline states that Airbus has provided EASA with a quote-unquote
"line to take" - that is to say, guidelines on how to react after
the airline reported the surface degradation to a number of its A350s.
On the other hand, not only does Airbus firmly refuse such allegations,
but it also maintains that Qatar Airways might have worked with the Qatari aviation
regulator to improve the airline's commercial position with Airbus to boost its compensation.
At a preliminary hearing held in London on November 11th, Qatar Airways' lawyers focused
on the alleged collusion involving Airbus and EASA ahead of a trial scheduled for June 2023.
Philip Shepherd, lawyer for the airline, asserts that Airbus CEO,
Guillaume Faury, was extensively involved with
EASA, to the point of having been defined as the quote "man calling the shots" on the dispute.
Shepherd maintains that Airbus continuously tried to convince
EASA of the airworthiness of the A350, providing, at the same time,
suggestions on how the agency should communicate the matter with others, such as the media.
Consequently, Shepherd stated that the European aviation regulator was heavily influenced by
Airbus when producing its reports, basing facts on Airbus' reassurances rather than
EASA's observations. In conclusion, the lawyer stated it is clear that Airbus
succeeded in exercising its influence over EASA as it relates to the dispute.
To support its theory, Shepherd brought to court an email dated July 2021,
in which Sabine Klauke, Chief Technical Officer for Airbus, referred to a call with
EASA's executive director, Patrick Ky. In the email, Klauke states:
"Patrick was fully committed to call his QCAA [Qatar Civil Aviation Authority] counterpart
and see with him how they would help them to justify putting the Aircraft back in the air"
According to Shepherd, this email proves conspiracy between Airbus and EASA.
David Wolfson, lawyer representing Airbus, responded to the alleged collusion by Shepherd,
stating that the email is a mere example of standard communication
one would expect a company like Airbus to have with its regulator.
Wolfson stated Airbus has offered to make a disclosure regarding the alleged
collusion involving Mr Faury and EASA, something the judge subsequently ordered.
Furthermore, Wolfson stated that the airline might have wrongfully conspired with the
Qatar Civil Aviation Authority to improve its commercial position against Airbus.
On his side, Shepherd maintained no conspiracy could be proved to exist
between the Qatari airline and the Qatari regulator, pointing to Airbus'
internal documents showing that Airbus understood the seriousness of the matter.
In written submissions, Wolfson stated Airbus first heard about the paint issue when two
Qatar A350s showing surface degradation had received quote-unquote "minor paint
touch-up works" and then continued to fly. According to Wolfson, this represents a
relevant statement if one considers the airline questioning the airworthiness of the aircraft.
A further preliminary hearing is expected to be held in December.
What do you think of this latest development? Let us know in the comments!