Most recent postings on IFTTA News

• USA: airlines ask DOT for another delay in new rules;
• USA: no private right of action pursuant to Air Carrier Access Act;
• UNESCO recognizes Aceh’s Saman Dance as Intangible World Heritage
• Scotland: Human Trafficking Report;
• EU: Commission requests Italy to comply with new safety rules for passenger ships;
• Taiwan: Hong Kong Dragon Airlines accused of discrimination;
• European Commission updates airline black list;
• New EU-US agreement on PNR;
• USA: DOT fines Spirit Airlines for deceptive price advertising;
• European Union: new rules on the use of security scanners at European airports;
• European Union: new Directive on Consumer Rights published in Official Journal;
• IFTTA Europe Workshop Website Online;
• Cruise conference - May 21-23, 2012;
• UK: OFT takes next procedural step in airline fuel surcharges case;
• USA: DOT issues first fine for tarmac delay rule violations;
• India: tiger reserves may ban tourists;
• Court of Cassation (FR) on Deep vein thrombosis;
• UNWTO: European tourism grows above expectations;
• European Consumer Centre Network launches Air Passengers Rights Report 2011;
• USA: DOT fines Caribbean Airlines for improperly limiting reimbursements for delayed baggage;

USA: Airline sued for USD 5 million over bag fee

Danielle Covarrubias of Pierce County, Washington, wants American Airlines to pay USD 5 million.

The airline "has breached its agreements with its passengers every time they have lost or delayed luggage and failed to refund the passengers their baggage fee," according to a class action complaint Covarrubias filed in federal court earlier this month.

American Airlines is disputing her version of events and stressing that passengers can always request a fee refund as part of a baggage claim.

Source: CNN.com; find article here>>.

European Court of Justice: liability limit of Montreal Convention includes both material and non-material damage

The Montral Convention provides that the liability of a carrier in the case of destruction, loss, damage or delay of baggage is limited to the sum of 1000 Special Drawing Rights (SDR) for each passenger (a sum equivalent to approximately €1134.71)3, unless a passenger has made, at the time when the checked baggage was handed over to the carrier, a special declaration of interest in delivery at destination and has paid a supplementary sum if the case so requires. In that case, as a rule a carrier is liable to pay a sum not exceeding the declared sum.

On 14 April 2008, Mr Walz brought an action against the airline Clickair claiming damages from it for the loss of checked baggage in the context of a flight from Barcelona (Spain) to Oporto (Portugal) operated by that company. In that action, Mr Walz claimed total damages of €3200: €2700 for the value of the lost baggage and €500 for non-material damage resulting from that loss. The Juzgado de lo Mercantil nº 4 de Barcelona (Commercial Court No 4, Barcelona, Spain), before which the proceedings were brought, asks whether the limit of air carriers’ liability set by the Montreal Convention in the case of loss of baggage includes both material and non-material damage or whether, on the contrary, material damage is subject to the limit of 1000 SDR, while, on the other hand, non-material damage is subject to a further limit of the same amount, so that the total combined limit for material and non-material damage is 2000 SDR.

European Court of Justice on May 6, 2010 ruled that for the purposes of determining the limit of an air carrier’s liability for the damage resulting, inter alia, from the loss of baggage, the term ‘damage’ in the Montreal Convention must be interpreted as including both material and non-material damage.

Source: ECJ press release 43/10
Full text of judgement Walz v Clickair C-63/09 available here>>.

Spain: Court ruling on missed connecting flight and lost baggage

Plaintiffs purchased flight tickets from Barcelona to Mexico City via London. The initial flight to London took off 30 minutes delayed. As a consequence, plaintiffs missed their connecting flight to Mexico City. The airline placed the plaintiffs on an alternative flight, which arrived in Mexico City more than nine hours later than originally planned. On arrival a piece of plaintiffs' luggage was lost.

First instance court granted €1,200 in damages for the delay under EU Regulation 261/2004 and €1,150 in compensation for the lost suitcase, pursuant to Article 22 of the Montreal Convention.

On appeal of both parties, Barcelona Provincial Court ruled that

• the original flight could not be divided into two separate flights (ie, Barcelona to London and London to Mexico City), but must be considered as a whole (ie, Barcelona to Mexico City) compensate plaintiffs in the amount determined at first instance and
• compensation for material and non material damages together may not exceed the limit established in the Montreal Convention and again confirmed the amount of compensation determined at first instance.

Source (Copyright): ILO Newsletter; find article by Miguel Gordillo here>>.

Summary posted with kind permission of author and pursuant to ILO copy right information.

ECJ Advocate General Mazák: liability limits of Montreal Convention cover both, non-material and material damage

Mr. Walz' checked suitcase was lost on 4 June 2007 during a flight from Barcelona to Porto operated by Clickair. Mr Walz claimed damages of EUR 3 200: EUR 2 700 for the value of the lost baggage and EUR 500 for non-material damage resulting from that loss. Clickair challenged the amount of the damages claimed because it exceeded the limit for liability for lost baggage laid down by Article 22.2 Montreal Convention.

The referring court (Juzgado de lo Mercantil No 4 de Barcelona) observed that the Montreal Convention did not draw any distinction according to the type of damage to which the carrier’s liability relates, and took the view that the limitation on the carrier’s liability should cover both non-material and material damage. However, it indicated that a number of interpretations of Article 22.2 of the Montreal Convention were possible.

In his opinion delivered on 26 January 2010, Advocate General Mazák proposed that the Court should answer the question referred as follows:

• Article 22(2) of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage, signed in Montreal on 28 May 1999, must be interpreted as meaning that, in the transport of baggage, the liability of the carrier in the case of destruction, loss, damage or delay is limited to 1 000 Special Drawing Rights per passenger in total, whatever the type of damage and the method of providing compensation.

Case C-63/09 - Axel Walz v. Clickair S.A; full text of opinion available here>>.

USA: 2009 showed improved airline on-time performance and decreased rate of mishandled baggage

The nation’s largest airlines had an on-time performance rate in 2009 that was their best since 2003, according to the Air Travel Consumer Report released today by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). In addition, the report shows that the carriers’ rate of mishandled baggage last year was the lowest recorded since 2004.

According to information filed with the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), a part of DOT’s Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA), the 19 carriers reporting on-time performance recorded an overall on-time arrival rate of 79.5 percent in 2009, an improvement over 2008’s rate of 76.0 and the best annual record since the 82.0 percent on-time rate of 2003. In addition, the carriers recorded a mishandled baggage rate of 3.91 per 1,000 passengers in 2009, an improvement over 2008's 5.26 and the best mark for a calendar year since the rate of 3.84 recorded in 2002.

Source: RITA press release of Feb 12, 2010; find full text here>>.

Prohibited items lists EU+USA

USA

1a.

You can find the list of prohibited items published by the TSA which applies to flights originating within the USA (3/2009):

List USA

1b.

The TSA also provides rules for liquids, the so called '3-1-1 for Carry-Ons':

3-1-1 Carry-Ons

EU

2a.

Code word: "Hermeticism"

• In the EU originally Regulation 2320/2002/EC on common rules in the field of civil aviation security as amended by Regulation 849/2004/EC (subject: All EU airports, service providers, catering, cleaning and cargo parties as well as all airlines both EU and foreign departing or transiting any EUairport) provided a secret (!!!) list of prohibited items, which the ECJ decided in Case (GC) C-345/06 (Heinrich) has to be published due to Regulation 1049/2001/EC regarding public access.
• A new Regulation as of 11.03.2008 repealing the former one has been issued but is not applicable yet: Regulation 300/2009/EC
• A new list of prohibited items based on Art 4 Para 2 Regulation 2320/2002/EC has been published by Regulation 820/2008/EC as amended by Regulation 483/2009/EC: Current and consolidated version of Regulation 820/2008/EC as of 30.06.2009

2b.

The well known rules regarding liquids as of 2006 can be found here:

Security rules

2c.

Initial plans to set legal limits at European level to the size of carry-on cabin baggage in airplanes have been withdrawn; likewise plans of the Commission to an end of the ban of liquids.

USA: DOT warns airlines to follow lost luggage-rules

In a newly issued notice, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) reminded airlines that they may not arbitrarily limit compensation for passengers who purchase necessities because their baggage is lost or delayed. A number of carriers have policies stating that they will reimburse passengers only for buying necessities purchased more than 24 hours after arrival and limiting such reimbursements to the outbound legs of trips. This is in violation of DOT regulations which require that airlines cover all expenses caused by lost or delayed baggage up to $3,300 per passenger on domestic flights.

Source: DOT Office of Public affairs; read message here>>; DOT Guidelines on Reimbursement of Passenger Expenses incurred as a result of lost, damaged or delayed baggage available for download in pdf here>>.

Spain: refrence for preliminary ruling on Montral Convention in regard to non-material damages

Commercial Court Barcelona (Juzgado de lo Mercantil 4, Barcelona) filed a reference for preliminary ruling to the European Court of Justice on whether the limit of liability referred to in Article 22.2 of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage, signed in Montreal on 28 May 1999, included both non-material damage and material damage resulting from the loss of baggage.

Case C-63/09; Reference published OJ C 102 of 01.05.2009, p.11.

ECJ: Art 22.2 Montreal Convention - material/non-material damage

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil 4, Barcelona

Case C-69/09 (Walz/Clickair)

Question referred:

Does the limit of liability referred to in Article 22.2 of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage, signed in Montreal on 28 May 1999, include both non-material damage and material damage resulting from the loss of baggage?

USA: class action against British Airways admitted

United States District Judge Nicholas Garaufis of United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, denied British Airways' motion to dismiss a consumer class action, filed in 2007, which seeks to recover travelers' actual losses rather than a US$1,500 cap the airline uses to limit damages. The court noted and rejected the airline's "extreme position" that it was not responsible for actual losses for lost baggage unless its mishandling rate was worse than 50%.
The suit seeks to represent American passengers who flew internationally on British Airways and had their luggage lost, damaged or delayed between September 5, 2005 and September 5, 2007.

Source: eTurboNews; find article here>>.

"Vice-President Antonio Tajani launches an investigation into lost luggage figures"

According to the EU Press Room, "The lost luggage phenomenon when travelling by air has been brought to the attention of the European Commission. Some recent figures published by the UK Air Transport Council (AUC) confirm the concerns expressed by Vice-President Tajani's, in charge of Transport. Vice-President Tajani decided today to take immediate measures on passenger rights starting with an investigation on the scale of the phenomenon. The European Commission's Directorate-General for Transport and Energy will ask today for information from the Airports International Council, and the Association of European Airlines and other parties concerned. The Commission will also contact AUC that was the first to reveal this information. "Safeguarding passenger rights is an essential component of European transport policy. The European Commission wants to be close to its citizens, providing them with solutions to the problems they encounter. It is for this reason that I have decided to act immediately so as to shed some light on these alarming figures which, if they were to be confirmed, would call for a strong political intervention," said Vice-President Tajani. The European Commission is evaluating the effective application of Regulation 889/2002 on luggage loss and damage. At the end of this investigation the Commission will then assess whether any improvements to the Regulation are required."

British Airways: Eurpoean top in lost luggage and flight delays?

The Times reports that due to a confidential study, British Airways loses more bags and operates more delayed planes than any other big airline in Europe. Allegedly nine passengers on every British Airways jumbo lose their bags. Last year BA lost 26.5 bags per 1,000 passengers, compared with 23 in 2006. In the first six months of 2008, 25.8 bags were mislaid per 1,000 travellers. According to the report, BA cannot lay the entire blame for its mislaid bags and delays on Terminal 5.

Find the article here>>.

"Aviation Security: European Commission avoids undue operational complications and inconvenience for passengers on cabin baggage size"

As stated by the EU Press Room, "Initial plans to set legal limits at European level to the size of carry-on cabin baggage in airplanes have been withdrawn by a Regulation which comes into force today. In October 2006, security experts initially advised the European Commission to limit the maximum permitted size of cabin baggage throughout the EU to 56 cm x 45 cm x 25 cm. However, introduction was delayed pending in-depth studies and analysis ordered by the Commission. In its efforts to focus only on the most efficient security measures, the Commission considers that the effectiveness of this measure does not justify the additional costs and inconvenience to airline passengers."

This Press Release is available in full text.

Missing airline baggage up 25 pct in 2007

Airline passengers suffered more delays than ever in retrieving their luggage last year as 42 million bags went missing, 25 per cent more than in 2006, according to a report issued on Thursday.
Of these, 3 percent or one bag for every 2,000 travellers, were never found, said the report from the Geneva-based SITA organisation which provides computerised services including baggage handling to the air travel industry.
SITA said the overall cost to carriers of mishandled baggage in 2007 was some $90 per piece for a total of $3.8 billion, which the industry -- just returning to profit after six years of global losses -- could ill afford.

Find full article here>>.

UK: Air Transport Users Council (AUC) published Delayed Baggage Table for 2007

The Air Transport Users Council (AUC) calling themselves "the UK's consumer watchdog for the aviation industry" published a table on the baggage handling performance of the member airlines of the Association of European Airlines (AEA) for 2007.
According to the airlines’ own data, an average of 16.6 bags per thousand passengers were delayed on flights operated by the major European network airlines in 2007. This compares to 15.7 bags per thousand passengers for 2006. It is notable that those AEA airlines that tend to operate connecting flights through “hub” airports come out worst. For example, Air France, KLM and British Airways all take up places in the top five poorest performers for 2007. This is borne out by industry research, which, according to the AEA, shows that 61% of baggage incidences are related to connecting passengers.

Source: Air Transport Users Council Press Notice (including table).

USA: Airline Liable for Death from Lost Baggage

The United States Court of Appeals upheld a lower Federal Court's ruling against American Airlines. The airline forced an elderly woman to check her bag along with necessary medical devices.
The airline lost her checked items. The victim died at age 65 after flying from Los Angeles to Guyana in 1997. It is thought that this is the first case to ever hold an airline liable for the death of a passenger caused by delay or missing baggage.
The lower court had ruled that the airlines were responsible for a "willful misconduct" death. The District Court concluded that the seizure of the victim's bag proximately caused her death.
Source: raleigh.injuryboard.com; read full article here.

Restrictive clauses on conveyance of certain goods in checked air baggage invalid

German Supreme Court (BGH) found two clauses invalid whereby an airline tried to interdict conveyance of breakable or perishable goods, computers and other electronic devices, jewellery, valuables, cash money, business papers and commercial samples in checked baggage and to restrict its liabilty to intent or gross negligence, even if goods were carried in knowledge of the airline. BGH found these clauses inconsistent with the mandatory rules of Art. 17 of the Montreal Convention and therefore invalid (BGH 05.12.2006, X ZR 165/03)

(Originally posted by Michael Wukoschitz)

Ticket lost - still entitled to carriage?

"No compensation will be granted if tickets were stolen or lost ." Such provision used in the general condiditons of contract of a German coach tour company was held ineffective by Germany's Supreme Court: the provision was inappropriate as it would frustrate purpose of contract when ticket got lost, even though a register of passengers allowed bus driver to verify passgenger's right to carriage.(Press release 17/2005 by BGH/German Supreme Court)

(Originally posted by Michael Wukoschitz)