[Peetwo]

Finally GlenB puts a pitch to the Lawyers?? - 

Via the UP:

Lawyer Letter- After many years.

---

To the relevant person,

Re: Request for legal assistance concerning CASA, alleged misfeasance in public office, and alleged misinformation provided to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation

I write to seek your firm’s assistance in relation to serious matters arising from the conduct of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), including what I allege to be misfeasance in public office by Mr Jonathan Aleck, CASA’s Executive Manager, Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs, and a further matter concerning alleged false or misleading information provided by CASA to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation. The investigation was conducted over 5 years by the Ombudsman office into the closure of my business of more than a decade by Mr Aleck.

I note that your area of expertise is police and prison matters, although entirely different “industries”, I can see that your firm appears to most accurately reflect what I require. Processes, deceptive statements, false and misleading information, etc are all relevant across both “industries”.

I have submitted two complaints to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) , in the last week, and I am seeking an AFP investigation to determine whether it is CASA or myself that provided disinformation to that investigation.

One concerns the alleged misuse of public power and possible misfeasance in public office arising from CASA’s actions and decisions affecting my businesses.

The other concerns the alleged provision of disinformation, false information or materially misleading information to the Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation. I understand that the two matters may raise distinct legal, administrative-law, integrity and evidentiary issues, although they substantially overlap factually.

The complaints are as follows:

Complaint 202673103937-7750, submitted to the NACC on 3 July 2026, concerns the allegation that disinformation was provided to a Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation.
Complaint 2026823195144-7108, submitted to the NACC on 24 August 2026, concerns the allegation that Mr Aleck acted with targeted malice in causing only my business to close, and not other businesses with identical structures.

The complaints were not submitted in chronological order. Mr Aleck’s alleged conduct preceded the five-year Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation, although the complaint concerning the Ombudsman investigation was submitted to the NACC first.

At this stage, I have provided only summary information to the NACC. The initial stage appears to require sufficient definition of the complaint for the NACC to determine whether the matter falls within its jurisdiction. I originally approached the AFP but was advised that the matter should first be referred to the NACC for possible referral to the AFP.

The first allegation is that Mr Jonathan Aleck, CASA’s Executive Manager, Legal, International and Regulatory Affairs, acted with targeted malice in causing my business, and no comparable businesses, to close.

The second allegation is that CASA provided disinformation to the Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation on several matters that were critical to its assessment, presumably for the purposes of concealing the misconduct of Mr Aleck, and misrepresenting my business as fifferent to other flying schools. The difference has never been identified to me, and cannot be because it is entirely a fabricated difference that CASA will be unable to identify.

I allege that Mr Jonathan Hanton, a CASA employee serving as the CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner, provided that disinformation.
My allegation also concerns the Chair of the CASA Board, Air Chief Marshal (Retd) Mark Binskin, and CASA’s Chief Executive Officer, Ms Pip Spence. Having met with them and ensured that they were fully briefed, I believe they had sufficient expertise, access and responsibility to test the relevant facts. I am therefore concerned that the alleged disinformation would not have misled the Commonwealth Ombudsman investigation had they acted appropriately.

I gave both the Chair of the Board and the CASA CEO multiple opportunities to act on those concerns. In my view, they instead endorsed the narrative I allege to be deceptive, and I am concerned that they were complicit in allowing it to stand.

I have prepared a detailed formal complaint concerning the alleged misuse of public power in CASA’s handling of my aviation businesses and the restrictions it imposed. In summary, I allege that CASA, through Mr Aleck’s decision-making or influence, imposed and maintained those restrictions without a proper lawful basis, an identified safety case, a specific regulatory breach, or adequate regard to CASA precedent, procedural fairness, natural justice and administrative-law obligations. I allege that the resulting harm included significant commercial loss, reputational damage, personal hardship and the effective destruction of the business.

A related concern is the information CASA provided to the Commonwealth Ombudsman during its investigation of my complaint. I allege that CASA provided materially inaccurate, incomplete or misleading information, including about whether CASA had previously approved or permitted the operating structure used by my businesses and whether my flying school was voluntarily sold or, in practical effect, closed as a result of CASA’s conduct. I also allege that relevant information and witnesses were not properly placed before the Ombudsman, with the result that material issues were not fully or fairly examined.

I am seeking legal assistance to assess the available causes of action, the strength of the evidence, the appropriate forum or forums, and the steps required to preserve and obtain relevant records. I am particularly concerned that any assessment be independent, properly documented and not dependent on CASA’s internal characterisation of events.

The available material includes contemporaneous CASA correspondence, interim approvals, requests for a formal decision, complaints and submissions to CASA, the CASA Board, Ministers and oversight bodies, the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s findings, references to external legal advice obtained by CASA, a recording of a meeting on 4 April 2019, and further evidence of the financial, operational and reputational harm allegedly caused by CASA’s conduct.

I would be grateful if your firm could advise whether it is able to conduct an initial review and provide advice on my legal options, including any potential claim for misfeasance in public office, any related administrative-law remedies, any issues arising from the alleged provision of misleading information to an oversight body, and any steps required to protect my position while the NACC complaints are assessed.

I have received informal advice from a lawyer who is no longer practising, and who has substantial familiarity with my matter, that the following issues should be considered as part of any legal assessment:

• negligent misstatement and estoppel;
  
• misfeasance in public office; and
  
• breaches of administrative law.
  
• Providing disinformation to a Commonwealth ombudsman investigation.
  

Some considerations as part of the assessment. CASA has cautiously accepted a measure of responsibility by offering to support an Act of Grace payment which is an avenue that a legal firm may be able to provide guidance on. Act of Grace Payments | Department of Finance

A further consideration is that my allegations are supported by numerous expert witnesses, including former CASA personnel with direct knowledge of the matter, who are available to assist in establishing the facts if called upon. These witnesses were made available to the Ombudsman investigation, the Chair of the CASA Board and the CASA Industry Complaints Commissioner, yet none was contacted. That omission raises serious concern as to whether there was ever a genuine intention to identify the readily ascertainable truth.

Another relevant consideration is that, although CASA closed my flying school at midnight on 30 June 2019, it has never provided a formal decision despite my repeated requests. This limits my ability to give you complete particulars. I have included CASA’s original request for documents, which appears to have become the foundation for the matter. In the ordinary course, a case of this nature would begin with a Show Cause Notice (SCN), but CASA did not issue one.

I understand that other potential causes of action or remedies may also require consideration.

Please let me know whether you would be willing to review the complaint documents and supporting evidence, and whether you would prefer that I provide the material electronically before an initial conference. I would also appreciate advice on any limitation periods, evidence-preservation steps, confidentiality considerations, and whether any immediate correspondence should be sent to CASA, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the NACC or any other relevant body.

I acknowledge the seriousness of these allegations and do not ask your firm to accept them without independent analysis. My request is that the material be reviewed carefully so I can obtain clear advice about the legal merits, evidentiary requirements, procedural options and next steps.

I can be contacted via my email defendapta@gmail.com or my mobile on 0418772013.

The two documents of approximately 70- pages each that I have prepared to submit to the NACC are immediately available if they would assist you in your consideration. Each document attends to each of the claims. They are intended as a comprehensive but by no means exhaustive information pack. I have tried to effectively provide a document that will assist in an efficient assessment of my matter and allegations.

Yours faithfully,

Glen Buckley

 MTF...P2