header-logo header-logo

Planes, blame & claims!

22 November 2019 / Katherine Deal KC , Asela Wijeyaratne
Issue: 7865 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail
11891
Katherine Deal QC & Asela Wijeyaratne consider the meaning of ‘accident’ under the Montreal Convention
  • Exclusive liability regime & the requiremnt that bodily injury is suffered as a result of an ‘accident’.

In our last update we discussed recent cases under the Montreal Convention pushing the boundaries of one element of the cause of action for recovery of damages for injury under article 17(1) – the requirement that ‘bodily injury’ is suffered (‘Flying in the face of convention’, NLJ 14 June 2019, p9). Here, we examine the recent High Court decision of Labbadia v Alitalia (Societa Aerea Italiana S.p.A) [2019] EWHC 2103 (Admin), which places strain on another element of the cause of action—the requirement that the bodily injury is suffered as a result of an ‘accident’.

The Montreal Convention 1999 is a multilateral treaty to which the UK is a party. The Convention applies to international carriage of passengers by aircraft. It provides (among other things) an exclusive liability regime for the death or injury to passengers.

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll