Shannon Aerospace Limited yesterday succeeded in overturning an order directing its records custodian to give evidence on commission here to assist in US court actions arising from a 1996 air crash in the Florida Everglades in which 110 people died.
On February 1st last, Sabretech Incorporated, a US aircraft maintenance company, secured an order that Shannon's records custodian, Mr Raymond Kazmaier czak, appear to be examined on oath.
In proceedings before Mr Justice McCracken earlier this month, Shannon sought to have that order overturned claiming Sabretech was really seeking production of documents.
Relatives of those killed in the Florida air disaster have taken US proceedings claiming damages against a number of defendants including Valuejet Airlines Inc, owner and operator of the aircraft which crashed, and SabreTech. Shannon is not involved in the US litigation.
It is alleged Sabretech had removed oxygen generators from three Valujet aircraft and returned them to Miami International Airport where they were ultimately loaded onto the aircraft which crashed. The plaintiffs in the US action allege the generators caused a fire in the cargo hold which was the cause of the crash.
Giving his reserved judgment on Shannon's application yesterday, Mr Justice McCracken said Shannon Aerospace had similarly removed oxygen generators from a different Valujet aircraft. The evidence sought by Sabretech concerned the practices and procedures concerning maintenance, removal, replacement and disposal of such generators.
The judge said he thought it was clear what was required by Sabretech were the documents in the custody of Shannon Aerospace and not any testimony from Mr Kazmaierczak such as provided for in Section One of the Foreign Tribunals Evidence Act.
The Section did not authorise a court to make an order simply for discovery of documents. The judge said all Mr Kazmaierczak could do was produce documents but this was clearly the class of evidence excluded from the Foreign Tribunals Act. The real basis for seeking his evidence was to obtain the equivalent of discovery of documents. Accordingly, he would set aside the order.
