Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Airlines Refusal Assistance Reduced Mobility case law

  • 11-11-2013 9:20pm
    #1
    Morris_fe1s
    Closed Accounts Posts: 155 ✭✭


    Im looking for some assistance in ascertaining the leading/ pertinant case(s) in Ireland in relation to the refusal of airlines assisting passengers with reduced mobility in the circuit court or above? seem to be a little stuck obtaining this data oddly enough

    (1) (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council
    (2) Montreal Convention and Regulation
    (3) Warsaw convention
    (4) Air Navigation and Transport Act, 1936 seems to be pretty much irrelevant

    Does 1107 take precedence over Montreal and Warsaw convention as its Eu law and dated after the former 2 pieces of legislation?

    I wonder is this still right today and is it the leading case:
    "The proper approach to the interpretation of the Warsaw Convention was considered by the Supreme Court in AHP Manufacturing v. DHL Worldwide Network [2001] 4 IR 531. Fennelly J. stated as follows at 541:-
    "Although the Convention enjoys the force of law in the State by virtue of the Air Navigation and Transport Acts, it is an international agreement. As such, it should receive a purposive interpretation."


Comments

  • #2
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,494 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Morris_fe1s wrote: »
    Im looking for some assistance in ascertaining the leading/ pertinant case(s) in Ireland in relation to the refusal of airlines assisting passengers with reduced mobility in the circuit court or above? seem to be a little stuck obtaining this data oddly enough
    There was a case with Ryanair and either Luton or Stansted - I think the latter. Not an Irish case, but would be persuasive.
    Does 1107 take precedence over Montreal and Warsaw convention as its Eu law and dated after the former 2 pieces of legislation?
    It would, insofar as the scope of 1107 applies.


  • #3
    Morris_fe1s
    Closed Accounts Posts: 155 ✭✭Morris_fe1s


    Victor wrote: »
    There was a case with Ryanair and either Luton or Stansted - I think the latter. Not an Irish case, but would be persuasive.
    It would, insofar as the scope of 1107 applies.

    http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/06daad8918d8621780257a00005be837?OpenDocument

    I took this quote from AHP Manufacturing v. DHL Worldwide (p 5.4) - and it would seem slightly confusing?
    Nolan v. Aer Lingus Group PLC (Circuit Court, 9th November, 2009) where Judge Linnane concluded at page 7:-
    'The authorities show that in all questions relating to a carrier's liability it is the provisions of the Convention which apply and a passenger does not have access to any other remedies..."


  • #4
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,494 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Do those cases refer to unaccompanied freight?


  • #5
    RCUK
    Registered Users Posts: 1 ✭RCUK


    No, (EC)1107/2006 does not supersede the Montreal Convention. Refer to the court of appeal ruling on "Tony Hook v British Airways Plc" and to the following statement of the EU Commission:

    "The services of the Commission agree that Regulation 1107/2006 does not override the Montreal Convention. The Montreal Convention forms an integral part of the Community legal order. Community institutions and Member States are bound by international treaties concluded by the Community and, consequently those agreements have primacy over secondary Community legislation such as Regulation 1107/2006,"


  • #6
    Morris_fe1s
    Closed Accounts Posts: 155 ✭✭Morris_fe1s


    RCUK wrote: »
    No, (EC)1107/2006 does not supersede the Montreal Convention. Refer to the court of appeal ruling on "Tony Hook v British Airways Plc" and to the following statement of the EU Commission:

    "The services of the Commission agree that Regulation 1107/2006 does not override the Montreal Convention. The Montreal Convention forms an integral part of the Community legal order. Community institutions and Member States are bound by international treaties concluded by the Community and, consequently those agreements have primacy over secondary Community legislation such as Regulation 1107/2006,"

    Quote from Tony Hook v British Airways Plc: That You mentioned above RCUK
    "There is also an intervention from the Secretary of State for Transport, who submits that there is legal space for the operation of both the EU Regulation and the Convention and that in fact, one compliments the other.
    One likely outcome of the hearing in the Court of Appeal is that the matter will be referred to the CJEU."

    My take on it is that a reasonable Irish District or Circuit Court will suggest that the Montreal convention goes hand in hand with 1107/2006
    and where Montreal fails to protect then 1107/2006 will fall into place."


  • Advertisement
Advertisement