This article examines the relationship between the Cape Town Convention (insofar as it relates to aircraft) and the Geneva Convention. The latter continues to apply to rights not constituting international interests under, and to rights in aircraft below the minimum threshold set out in, the former. The Geneva Convention provides that the law of the state of registration of the aircraft in question is the applicable law for rights and interests covered by it but gives no guidance as to whether such law is the domestic law only of that state or includes that state's private international law rules. The Cape Town Convention provides that references in it to applicable law are to the domestic law of the state in question but, in fact, relevant references therein to applicable law are few and international interests under the Cape Town Convention are sui generis interests not dependent on national law. The relationship between the Convention on the International Recognition of Rights in Aircraft signed at Geneva on 19 June 1948 (the 'Geneva Convention') and the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment signed at Cape Town on

No abstract

As a result of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) coronavirus pandemic, and the consequent drastic limitations on, and reduction in demand for, air travel, many airlines are finding it difficult to pay rent to lessors on aircraft they lease or to repay financiers in respect of moneys to buy aircraft which they own. Airlines may be able to agree deferral or reduction in payment obligations, or even to any early return of the aircraft, but what legal recourse is there under international air law if agreement cannot be reached, and does it make sense to pursue it in the context of the pandemic? Lease, Finance, Frustration, Force majeure, Cape Town Convention