header-logo header-logo

22 November 2019 / Katherine Deal KC , Asela Wijeyaratne
Issue: 7865 / Categories: Features , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

Planes, blame & claims!

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll