the courts but it became necessary as PIA totally stopped payment of all commissions from 2010. We had to sustain our businesses without any commission and PIA did so to punish us for the action we therefore brought these proceedings because of the broken promises. We made several generous offers to the PIA to amicably settle the dispute but PIA was adamant and refused to hold any fruitful negotiations. “We will pursue our case against PIA for the rest of our claim; but also continue to support PIA ticket sales in order to save our national airline” they said.
The back ground to the dispute is that in around 1974, APTA was established as a private association with the support of PIA in the spirit of introducing PIA as an international airliner to the Pakistani community in the United Kingdom. In return of services of APTA, it was orally agreed that the PIA would pay a customary commission of 9% on all its ticket sales. It was further agreed - also orally - that the PIA would pay a further commission of 2% over and above any other commission(s) and incentives as an Over Riding Commission (ORC) to all those APTA members who would secure PIA ticket sales to the value of £250,000 or more per annum. These agreements were for an indefinite period. It was also agreed that APTA members will only promote PIA and each agent’s yearly sales must not be less than £250,000 per annum. As the business increased phenomenally, in 1998 PIA set the minimum benchmark at half a million pounds to qualify for the 2% ORC that the agents accepted. The PIA said there is no written agreement between the two but for the British courts it is sufficient to see that the two parties were engaged in business with each other for a minimum of three months.
It was around May 2006 that the PIA introduced an additional charge upon all its tickets, under the title of “YQ”; also known as “fuel charge” as “a government tax” therefore “non-commissionable”.
APTA members protested and required PIA to produce “written evidence” as to the claimed status of “YQ” as a “governmental imposed tax” as alleged but the PIA responded that since the PIA was owned by the government of Pakistan no one at the PIA had any personal financial interests as to “mislead” the APTA-UK members.
It was in May 2010, when the Australian Federal Court (AFC), in the matter of” Leonie’s Travel (PVT) Limited -v- Qantas Airways And Others (including British Airways) decided that the “YQ” fare (Fuel Surcharge) was a part of the price of airline ticket therefore the agents “are entitled to receive commission” in respect of the same on the agreed terms of commissions. Accordingly, Qantas Airways and others were required to pay £64million to the travel agents.
APTA-UK has another claim against PIA for payment of commissions in respect of sale of it’s’ tickets from October 2010 onwards which is up for hearing in February next year. The News tried to get response of the PIA about the court decision but several people in key positions in the UK and Pakistan when approached refused to comment.
Petitioner prays apex court to constitute a full court for hearing instant petition
Surge reflects impact of a deregulatory policy introduced earlier this year
Gandapur says govt aims to centralise database of marginalised segments of society
Police immediately transfers injured to hospital and registers case, initiating further investigation
Cache of narcotics was being transported by sea to international destinations