Bilateral agreements and agreements allow the sharing of the airworthiness certificate for civil aviation products between two countries. The definition of future relations between the EU and the UK in the area of air transport is within the competence of the UK Government in its negotiations with the EU. These agreements will ensure the continuity of agreements with the United States, Canada, Brazil and Japan when the United Kingdom leaves the European Union. International Policy Office. This office, including staff from Brussels and Singapore, is responsible for policy guidance on bilateral agreements, import and export of aviation products and other issues relating to international airworthiness, programmes and procedures. Several provisions of the agreement aim to ensure that each party retains its fundamental regulatory prerogatives – an effective recognition of the sovereignty of civil aviation authorities, first created by the Chicago Convention. In particular, Article 4 sets the limits and limits of reciprocity established by the US BASA and the EU. For example, each party is required to accept the findings of compliance and authorizations of the other party, but the agreement “should not be construed as implying the mutual adoption of standards or technical regulations of the contracting parties” unless it is included in the schedules. The parties also agreed to recognize the system of devolution of powers to “design partners”, i.e., the scope of the agreement is limited to the acceptance of the technical and legal judgments of the other in accordance with the distinction between regulatory systems. Article 5 describes the key role of annexes as the main mechanism for identifying differences in civil aviation systems, extending the scope of the convention and defining the basis for further harmonization. On 1 May 2011, the US-EU Cooperation Agreement on Civil Aviation Safety Regulation came into force. To assist organizations in their own planning, we listed the assumptions we used to develop our approach to the potential scenario that there will be no aviation safety agreements at the end of the transition period.
Our use of these assumptions does not mean that the CAA thinks this result is likely; they allow us, as a responsible regulator, to prepare for any eventuality. If this scenario materializes, we assume that in addition to airworthiness certification, bilateral aviation security agreements provide for bilateral cooperation in a wide range of aviation areas, including maintenance, air operations and environmental certification.