Montreal Convention

A

Ash

Registered User
Messages
310
Can anyone advise on a source of detailed information regarding the Montreal convention which applies to problems with air travel. The ECIC Dublin website has some information but I'm looking for more specifics or an alternative source. Through no fault of my own I was delayed in the US for over 24 hours plus and the airline doesn't care.
Also, I'm finding out that corresponding with getcover.com regarding a claim for the above requires the patience of Job.
 
All you need on air passenger rights in the EU:

[broken link removed]
 
I have some knowledge of this area (aviation law) and am happy to provide any help I can.

It may be useful for other users if you are as specific as possible with your question, including information on your to/from destinations and including all the relevant information.

CMCR
 
PMU, thank you for the link. That's a very informative site and something all air travellers should read and take note.

CMCR, thank you for the offer to help out in this case. I would be grateful for any knowledgeable input.
Having bought the through ticket online direct from a US carrier, I flew from Dublin to Chicago to Kansas City. On the return leg, the flight from KC was delayed by over an hour meaning I arrived in Chicago just in time to see the connecting flight to Dublin push away from the gate. I was rebooked on the next available flight but it was not for another 24 hours. No information or help was willingly made available by the carrier which eventually offered subsidised overnight accommodation and a toothbrush but nothing towards meals or phone calls. I had no access to my luggage during that time.
The delay was a major inconvenience and caused considerable out of pocket expenses. The carrier denies any responsibility. I believe they have more obligations and responsibilities to passengers. They have since blamed the cause of the delay to the flight (from KC to Chicago) as happening for operational reasons, caused by Chicago air traffic control.
If you can offer any insight to my rights under EU regulations and/or the Montreal Convention, I'd be more than grateful. I find the airline's attitude dismissive.
Thank you.
 
You will get nothing under EU regs as it is a US carrier and it happened in the US. For that reason I would never use US carriers when travelling to the states. They can deny you boarding with no comeback. A EU based carrier cannot do that.
 
CMCR & Others more knowledgeable than myself may have more to say on this .. but I'm not sure the Montreal convention will help you on this as that regulates International Air Travel as far as I know (it's part of the legal framework for IATA/ICAO I believe)... your problem arose on a US domestic flight (albeit with reprecussions for an international connection) so I don't know what covers this.
 
Hi Ash,

I hope this information is of assistance and will help to explain your rights. Prior to the implementation of the Montreal Convention 1999 and it's subsequent entry into force, the issue of airline liability internationally was subject to a complex number of liability regimes.

You and other readers may be familiar with some of these regimes for example, the Warsaw Convention 1929 and it's amending instrumentes and the EU Regulations of 1997 and 2002. The reason I make reference to both of these systems of liability regimes is they have an important bearing on how policy has been developed and implemented today.

The Montreal Convention 1999 introduces a number of new features - I won't go ito all of them today - save what refers to your question.

Article 22.1 of the Montreal Convention 1999 sets down the rules regarding damage caused by delay to passengers of 4,150 Special Drawing Rights (or SDR's). Today's (24 August 2005) IMF valuation for 4,150 SDRs is (approx 4,952 euro).

While many passengers suffer delay when flying, it's unusual for compensable damage to occur. Normal airline practice is to make provision for delayed passengers by way of subsistence and where necessary, overnight accommodation. The limit of 4,150 SDRs is probably sufficient to cover situations where an airline fails to do this in the event of delay. This limit may however be insufficient to cover the payment of significant resulting damages (such as a missed holiday) but these matters are normally covered by your travel isnurance.

Importantly, an airline is liable for passenger delays unless it, it's servants and agents took all reasonable measures to avoid the damage or it was impossible to take such measures. Incidentally, liability for passenger delays by EU air carriers under EU Regulations is governed by the same principles.

I suggest you bear the following in mind in considering whether to take this matter further. (I am playing devils advocate in relation to some of them but they should help claify the matter for you):

(a) Did the airline, its servants or agents do all in their power to avoid the damage
resulting in your delay?
(b) Are ATC (air traffic control) delays something the airline reasonably tried to avoid
or could reasonably prevent?
(c) What is/was the airline's normal practice in relation to delayed passengers and was
this procedure followed through in your experience?
(d) Article 1 (3) of Montreal Convention 1999 states that carriage to be performed by
several different carriers is to be undivided carriage if it has been agreed by the
parties as a single operation. Given you purchased a 'through ticket' from a single
carrier, my feeling is your dispute is with the US carrier form whom you purchased
the ticket.
(e) Given increased security checks at US and other airports did you leave enough
time between flights to cover any possible delays? You say the flight from KC to
Chicago was delayed by over 1 hour and when you arrived in Chicago your flight
was leaving. Should you have left more time than this between flights to take
account of any possible delays?

You didn't indicate in your question whether the carrier from Chicago to Dublin was an Irish air carrier. From what you have said, I don't believe the carrier from Chicago to Dublin was at fault anyway. As you arrived late in Chicago, the carrier from Chicago to Dublin was not obliged to allow you to board, since part of your contract of carriage with the Chicago-Dublin carrier involves presenting yourself on time for check-in.

Unless you can prove that the airline from KC to Chicago failed to reasonably avoid the delay or could reasonably expected to have prevented it, or the airline did not fulfil it's normal practice in terms of making provision for you - I think you you may have difficulty proving your case.

You don't have any claim under EU regulations if carrier was from the US in any event.

If you are still interested in pursuing your claim against this carrier - I would suggest you obtain legal advice from someone with expertise in Aviation Law and knowledge of precedent through the Courts in Ireland. There are a number of firms who deal with aviation-related matters but shop around and obtain some quotes for fees before you decide on a legal advisor.

Rgarding your insurance policy issues - you should again read the terms of your insurance policy (in the light of above) to see what the restrictions are/if any regarding passenger delays. Remember - you may refer your claim regarding insurance providers in Ireland to the Insurance Ombudsman ([broken link removed]).

I realise this area of aviation law is complex and it's hard to find out detailed information. I hope this is of assistance however.
 
Hi CMCR,
Many many thanks for taking the time and trouble to share your advice on this. While the area of aviation law does seem to be as dense as a London pea-souper, yours is the first bit of "straight talk" on this subject I've seen yet.
First things first.
The Chicago-Dublin carrier was American.
I also realise there was no fault with that flight which departed on time. It's just that the delay to the earlier flight meant I was not in Chicago in time.
Both flights were with the same carrier. However, I was CHECKED-IN for both flights at Kansas City.
When making the booking, I enquired whether there was enough time to make the connection at Chicago and was assured there was.

In answer to your itemised points:
(a) "Did the airline, its servants or agents do all in their power to avoid the damage resulting in your delay?" It's impossible to say. How could I ever prove it?

(b) "Are ATC (air traffic control) delays something the airline reasonably tried to avoid or could reasonably prevent?" As above. How could I know? I only have the word of the airline.

(c) "What is/was the airline's normal practice in relation to delayed passengers and was this procedure followed through in your experience?" Neither I, nor any of the other passengers, were given any information at the time as to why the plane from KC was delayed. As I said, any help or assistance at Chicago when I had the enforced stopover for 24 hours was practically non-existant. I don't know what American's policy is. If it is to do nothing, then they followed the procedure to the letter.

(d) "Article 1 (3) of Montreal Convention 1999 states that carriage to be performed by several different carriers is to be undivided carriage if it has been agreed by the parties as a single operation. Given you purchased a 'through ticket' from a single carrier, my feeling is your dispute is with the US carrier form whom you purchased the ticket." Both flights were with American. I too think they have greater responsibility to their passengers than they have so far shown.

(e) "Given increased security checks at US and other airports did you leave enough time between flights to cover any possible delays? You say the flight from KC to Chicago was delayed by over 1 hour and when you arrived in Chicago your flight was leaving. Should you have left more time than this between flights to take account of any possible delays?" The schedule was offered by American and, as indicated above, I checked directly with American about the connection time for all those reasons and was assured there was adequate time factored into the itinerary. Stupidly I suppose, I took their advice.

CMCR, you also wrote:
"Unless you can prove that the airline from KC to Chicago failed to reasonably avoid the delay or could reasonably expected to have prevented it, or the airline did not fulfil it's normal practice in terms of making provision for you - I think you you may have difficulty proving your case."
You encapsulate the problem well in that sentence. It boils down to my being able to prove anything. That's virtually impossible.

It's not so much the out of pocket expenses or the 24 hour shock stopover in themselves that is galling. It is the dismissive attitude the airline expresses. In short, they say they're not obliged to keep to their schedule. If you're unfortunate to be left in the lurch by them, their attitude seems to be: tough. For the amount involved, I can't see me taking legal proceedings.

What I do know is that I wont be flying again with American and I've encouraged anyone I know to bear in mind American's attitude to their passengers whenever they happen to be choosing which airline to fly with to the US.

Sincere thanks CMCR. I'll see where I go from here and let you know of any developments..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top