Skip to main content

Surprises in the Skies: Resolving the Circuit Split on How Courts Should Determine Whether an “Accident” is “Unexpected or Unusual” Under the Montreal Convention

By December 1, 2023January 11th, 2024No Comments

Abstract: Article 17 of both the Montreal Convention and its predecessor, the Warsaw Convention, imposes liability onto air carriers for certain injuries and damages from “accidents” incurred by passengers during international air carriage. However, neither Convention defines the term “accident.” While the United States Supreme Court opined that, for the purposes of Article 17, an air carrier’s liability “arises only if a passenger’s injury is caused by an unexpected or unusual event or happening that is external to the passenger,” it did not explain what standards lower courts should employ to discern whether an event is “unexpected or unusual.” In 2004, the Fifth Circuit looked to industry standards; in 2022, the First Circuit looked to the perspectives of a reasonable passenger. As a result, courts are now split on which methods they should adopt to determine whether an event constitutes an Article 17 “accident.”

This Comment looks at the history of the Warsaw and Montreal Conventions and how courts have traditionally interpreted the language of Article 17 to define “accidents.” It highlights the recent circuit split on the standards courts should adopt to determine if an event can properly be described as “unexpected and unusual” to constitute an Article 17 “accident.” Taking into consideration unique aspects of the commercial aviation industry, this Comment introduces a solution based on the existing “block time” model and proposes that courts should adopt separate standards depending on when the event takes place to determine whether an event can be classified as “unexpected or unusual” and thereby recoverable as an Article 17 “accident.”

Download the Full Article

Other Articles from WLR Print Edition

March 1, 2024 in PRINT EDITION

Preempting Private Prisons

Abstract: In 2019 and 2021, respectively, California and Washington enacted laws banning the operation of private prisons within each state, including those operated by private companies in contracts with the…
Read More
March 1, 2024 in PRINT EDITION

Speaking Back to Sexual Privacy Invasions

Abstract: Many big players in the internet ecosystem do not like hosting sexual expression. They often justify these bans as a protection of sexual privacy. For example, Meta states that…
Read More
March 1, 2024 in PRINT EDITION

From Precedent to Policy: The Effects of Dobbs on Detained Immigrant Youth

Abstract: In June 2022, the United States Supreme Court released the historic decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, holding that the U.S. Constitution does not protect an individual’s right to an…
Read More