Connect with us

Business and Economy

Airlines can be required to provide compensation for international disruptions: Supreme Court

Published

on

By Peter Zimonjic, CBC News, RCI

In a unanimous ruling, all nine justices of Canada’s Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by two airline associations and a group of air carriers that serve Canada and other international airports arguing that Canada’s passenger protection regulations violate international law. Photo: Radio-Canada / Clara Pasieka

Unanimous ruling dismisses appeal from airlines that said passenger protections violate international law

The Supreme Court confirms that airlines can be required to compensate passengers for certain international flight disruptions ruling that Canada’s passenger protection regulations do not violate international law.

In a unanimous ruling, all nine justices dismissed an appeal filed by two airline associations and a group of air carriers that serve Canada and other international airports.

The airlines had argued that Canada’s Air Passenger Protection Regulations brought in in 2019 violated the Montreal Convention, an international treaty that came into force in Canada in 2001.

The Air Passenger Protection Regulations (new window) impose obligations on airlines in cases of flight delays, cancellations, boarding denial and lost or damaged luggage.

Those obligations require airlines explain the reasons for delays and cancellations and provide certain free services — such as food, drink and access to washrooms — if a flight is delayed on the tarmac if the disruption is within a carrier’s control and was not required for safety purposes.

The regulations also require airlines refund baggage fees in cases where luggage is permanently lost or damaged, on top of any damages required under the Montreal Convention.

Article 29 of the convention says any action for damages against an airline is subject to the conditions and such limits of liability as are set out in the convention.

The airlines argued that Article 29 requires that the regime for how compensation is paid to passengers is exclusively regulated by the convention, and that the 2019 passenger protection provisions violate that exclusivity.

The question considered by the court was whether the compensation regime under the 2019 regulations that required airlines to compensate passengers with fixed financial rewards can exist alongside the Montreal Convention.

The case only considers compensation for international flights to and from Canada, not domestic flights.

Convention, regulations can co-exist, ruling says

In the decision, Justice Malcolm Rowe said the word action in the line any action for damages contained in the Montreal Convention refers to a court proceeding brought forward that can result in a judgment of damages based on a specific case.

Damages awards are ‘individualized’ in that they seek to compensate the plaintiff for the loss suffered as a result of an injury caused by another, Rowe wrote.

An action for damages is distinct from standardized compensation which … may be owed identically to all claimants irrespective of the harm (if any) they have suffered.

Rowe said because Canada’s Air Passenger Protection Regulations deal with standardized compensation, they are best understood as a consumer protection scheme — where passengers don’t need not to show they were harmed in order to be compensated a set amount.

The Regulations do not tie compensation to harm and inconvenience; rather they mandate compensation for delay, cancellation or denial of boarding based on the time by which a passenger’s arrival at their ultimate destination is delayed, Rowe said.

As long as the disruption in question occurred for a reason within the carrier’s control and was not required for safety purposes, the compensation is fixed.


This article is republished from RCI.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Maria in Vancouver

Lifestyle2 weeks ago

Nobody Wants This…IRL (In Real Life)

Just like everyone else who’s binged on Netflix series, “Nobody Wants This” — a romcom about a newly single rabbi...

Lifestyle3 weeks ago

Family Estrangement: Why It’s Okay

Family estrangement is the absence of a previously long-standing relationship between family members via emotional or physical distancing to the...

Lifestyle2 months ago

Becoming Your Best Version

By Matter Laurel-Zalko As a woman, I’m constantly evolving. I’m constantly changing towards my better version each year. Actually, I’m...

Lifestyle2 months ago

The True Power of Manifestation

I truly believe in the power of our imagination and that what we believe in our lives is an actual...

Maria in Vancouver3 months ago

DECORATE YOUR HOME 101

By Matte Laurel-Zalko Our home interiors are an insight into our brains and our hearts. It is our own collaboration...

Maria in Vancouver4 months ago

Guide to Planning a Wedding in 2 Months

By Matte Laurel-Zalko Are you recently engaged and find yourself in a bit of a pickle because you and your...

Maria in Vancouver4 months ago

Staying Cool and Stylish this Summer

By Matte Laurel-Zalko I couldn’t agree more when the great late Ella Fitzgerald sang “Summertime and the livin’ is easy.”...

Maria in Vancouver5 months ago

Ageing Gratefully and Joyfully

My 56th trip around the sun is just around the corner! Whew. Wow. Admittedly, I used to be afraid of...

Maria in Vancouver6 months ago

My Love Affair With Pearls

On March 18, 2023, my article, The Power of Pearls was published. In that article, I wrote about the history...

Maria in Vancouver6 months ago

7 Creative Ways to Propose!

Sometime in April 2022, my significant other gave me a heads up: he will be proposing to me on May...