header-logo header-logo

10 July 2014 / Rob Williams
Issue: 7614 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Up in the air

comment_dawson

Will the Dawson ruling ultimately be seen as a victory or a loss for the consumer, asks Rob Williams

Following within the space of little over a week on the heels of Jet2.com Ltd v Huzar [2014] EWCA Civ 791, [2014] All ER (D) 86 (Jun), Dawson v Thomson Airways [2014] EWCA Civ 845, [2014] All ER (D) 154 (Jun) is the second Court of Appeal flight delay compensation case to go against the airlines. The issue in Dawson was whether the limitation period was two years under the Montreal Convention or six years under the Limitation Act for bringing a flight delay claim.

Mr Dawson’s flight from Gatwick to the Dominican Republic was delayed and arrived at its destination over six hours late as a result of staff shortages. Dawson brought a claim pursuant to EU Regulation No. 261/2004 for compensation for the delay he experienced. Thomson Airways accepted they would have to compensate Dawson had he brought his claim in time, but argued that the limitation period was two years

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

Consumer credit law is heading for its biggest shake-up in 50 years, with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 set to yield much of its detailed statutory machinery to FCA rules
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
back-to-top-scroll