Latest news with #AirPassengerRights
The Star
5 days ago
- Business
- The Star
Seven EU airlines to be investigated over baggage fee policy
Passengers flying around Europe on budget airlines have faced increasingly harsh baggage rules and fees in recent years. — dpa European consumer rights groups have criticised seven of the continent's leading low-cost airlines for allegedly 'exploiting' passengers by charging for hand luggage and enforcing sometimes confusing and onerous stipulations. The European Consumer Organisation (BEUC) and 16 members from 12 countries have filed a complaint to the European Commission targeting Easyjet, Norwegian Airlines, Ryanair, Transavia, Volotea, Vueling and Wizzair over their demanding 'undue fees' from passengers for carry-on bags. 'We are calling for an EU-wide investigation into the commercial practices of the targeted airlines and the wider sector,' the BEUC announced. 'We are taking action against seven airlines who are exploiting consumers and are ignoring the EU top court which ruled that charging reasonably sized hand baggage is illegal,' said BEUC director-general Agustin Reyna. Reyna cited a 2014 EU Court of Justice assertion that 'carriage of hand baggage cannot be made subject to a price supplement, provided that it meets reasonable requirements in terms of its weight and dimensions and complies with applicable security requirements'. Reyna believes revising the EU's Air Passenger Rights regime is 'the perfect opportunity for the EU to clarify what services should be included in the basic ticket price'. 'Our data shows that consumers expect to see a small item and a piece of hand luggage when buying basic tickets,' he said, citing surveys carried out around the continent. Airlines in general have in recent years been tightening restrictions around and adding fees for baggage. These changes have affected long-haul trips run by more upmarket carriers based outside Europe but which fly to and from the continent. Some of these have cut the long-haul carry-on allowance to a short-haul-style 7kg – a limit that makes it very difficult to travel with cameras and related equipment – and require a fee for any checked baggage. 'We're asking for a small personal item and a piece of hand-luggage, be it a hand trolley, a suitcase or a backpack, to be accounted for in the price,' the BEUC said, in response to a question by dpa about baggage policies and fees applied by long-haul carriers. The BEUC added that any investigation or application of the rules would cover the sector as a whole, including all flights to and from Europe, and not just the seven European budget airlines named recently. 'We're also calling for establishing size and weight standards,' the organisation added. – dpa
CBC
6 days ago
- Business
- CBC
Air passenger rights group files court challenge to 'unconstitutional' rules it says muzzle travellers
Social Sharing Jill Rorabeck says she wishes she'd never turned to Canada's airline regulator to settle her dispute with Swoop Airlines. Not only did the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) side with the airline, Rorabeck can't even share the details of her dispute. The Toronto woman submitted a complaint almost three years ago with the CTA, which acts as a mediator between airlines and passengers in air travel complaints. She learned in January that she lost her case, but due to legislation passed in 2023 that prevents passengers from sharing full details of CTA decisions, she's not allowed to reveal key information about what happened. "No one can warn others about their experiences," said Rorabeck. "There is zero accountability on the part of the airlines or the CTA." The Air Passenger Rights organization — a Halifax-based nonprofit — has now filed a constitutional challenge in Ontario's Superior Court of Justice, arguing Canadians should have access to the decisions made by the CTA's quasi-judicial tribunal. "We believe that the way the complaint process has been set up at the Canadian Transportation Agency violates fundamental rights," said Air Passenger Rights founder Gábor Lukács. At issue is section 85.09(1) of the Canadian Transportation Act, which says once the CTA issues a decision, neither the airline nor the passenger involved is allowed to openly share the details — unless both parties agree. Since that rule was implemented, not a single case has been made fully public, which Lukács says gives airlines the strategic advantage of having access to previous rulings while passengers remain unaware of how complaints are being decided. "The only entities that benefit from this are the airlines," said Lukács. "Individual passengers don't have the experience or don't have the knowledge of what arguments work and don't work while the airlines compile these huge databases of their own cases." Prior to the 2023 changes, full decisions issued by the CTA were posted online, but now only basic information is available. So key details, such as the reasons behind a ruling, remain confidential. The regulator says the new system is faster, fair and more efficient. The lawsuit argues that the CTA has a quasi-judicial role, so rules that muzzle passengers violate the open court principle in law, which says court proceedings should be open to the public. It's a fundamental aspect of a democratic justice system, ensuring transparency and public confidence in the legal process, says Paul Daly, a constitutional lawyer and research chair in the Administrative Law and Governance program at the University of Ottawa. "The fact that decisions are not published and proceedings are kept confidential, it tilts the playing field in favour of the airlines," said Daly. "I, you or anyone else should be able to walk into any courthouse in the country any day of the week and attend a hearing or access documents … that are in the registry." As part of its legal argument, Air Passenger Rights asked for the decisions, reasons and all documents for five air passenger complaint files last July in an effort to demonstrate that the CTA systematically denies all such requests. The secretariat of the agency denied the request a month later, citing section 85.09(1) of the Canadian Transport Act as the basis for its refusal. "They are trying to use this provision as a way of refusing to disclose information that should be disclosed," Lukács said. The lawsuit argues that the current rules prevent Air Passenger Rights from doing its job, because it needs to know how complaints are being decided in order to provide information and resources to passengers and push for improvements. It also argues that the secrecy around decisions prevents media and other organizations from "effectively communicating information about air passenger complaint proceedings." The lawsuit calls for a hearing to be held by video conference. No date for the hearing has been set.
Hamilton Spectator
09-05-2025
- Hamilton Spectator
Is it rude to recline your seat on a flight? Here's what experts say about airplane etiquette
You've waited for hours in line, wrestled to find space in the overhead compartment, struggled to stake a claim in a shared armrest, and finally you find yourself seated for your flight, it's time to kick back and relax — but is it OK to recline? With videos surfacing online of reclining horror stories on flights, travellers and observers are debating: who's in the right and who's in the wrong? Here's what the experts have to say about airplane etiquette and what we — and our fellow passengers — can do to help each other get by while in the sky. Seats on flights in Canada have no regulated minimum size, and airlines make room for more of them by making seats thinner, using less material, said Gabor Lukacs, president of Air Passenger Rights, a Canadian non-profit. Some airlines configure seats differently so it doesn't feel you are sitting closer to your neighbours, even though you are, said Lukacs. And there is a trend that airlines sell shared seat-pitch — the space between your own seat and the back of the seat in front of you, said Lukacs, adding that 'in this type of arrangement, passengers are pitted against passengers.' Battles between airline passengers over reclining chairs do happen, said Kate Pepper, a Toronto-based travel influencer, flight attendant with Porter Airlines, and pilot-in-training, who has witnessed heated debates and spilled drinks. In one case, while the person in front 'had waited a long time to recline their seat' — not until after flight attendants collected garbage — they didn't check behind them before reclining, said Pepper, and 'the person behind had ordered a plethora of drinks that spilled on them. 'It was a really bad situation,' she said. While the person reclining was apologetic, the person spilled on was irate, she said. And a quick glance back before reclining may have avoided that. Woman who recorded video says American Airlines passenger repeatedly punched the back of her Toronto-based etiquette coach and owner of Business of Manners consultancy, Adeodata Czink, said while she advises against reclining chairs on planes, there are still courteous ways to check in with the person behind you and communicate your wish to recline. If you are going to recline, ease into it. Do not suddenly recline, said Czink. Instead, she suggests turning around to ask the person that you're going to inconvenience, 'Would it be too much of an inconvenience if I just recline my seat a little bit?' Do not recline 'right at the beginning of a flight, or when you get food,' said Czink, 'I have had people right in front of me who do that, and it's a sudden, wham ,' she said, 'especially if you've got some food on your tray still.' Instead, she suggests waiting until the most appropriate time, and even then, always checking in with your neighbours. It's about being mindful of other people and what the person behind you is doing, added Pepper. You can give them a heads-up, she said, 'No one wants to wear red wine.' Reclining chairs usually have different levels of recline, said Czink, adding she never reclines to the full extent the chair can. Instead, she eases her chair into the first pre-set level, and stays there. It's important to remember, said Pepper, 'it's OK for other people to recline their seat.' 'Seats on a plane recline for a reason,' said Pepper, 'people are trying to rest, especially on a night flight and that's OK.' Over the years, airlines have been squeezing more seats into airplanes with the goal of 'End of the day, etiquette is all about how you make other people feel,' said Nuwan Sirimanna, etiquette coach and founder of Etiquette Matters, based in Oakville. 'Consideration, respect and honesty are the three principles of etiquette,' said Sirimanna, noting 'it applies in every interaction.' 'When it comes to reclining seats, technically passengers have the right to recline,' said Sirimanna. 'But when it comes to etiquette, it's about being mindful for others,' he said. 'I always say, just because you can, doesn't mean you should,' said Sirimanna, 'At least not without consideration.' Travel can be stressful and uncomfortable, especially on flights without fresh air or much ability to move around, leaving people more easily agitated. The key, said Sirimanna, is to feel mentally prepared to keep your cool, even when things do not go as planned. 'If we crowd too many people for too long in too small a space, it is likely to create some aggression, likely to cause some problems,' said Lukacs. One of the best tips just before travelling is to imagine in your mind your flight and long journey, said Sirimanna. 'Visualize that not everything will go as smoothly as you expect and there could be unexpected scenarios or difficulties that arise,' he said. Do this first, and 'then mentally you are prepared before you face it.' If someone is not sharing space, how you react will also influence the outcome of the situation, especially midflight. Woman who recorded video says American Airlines passenger repeatedly punched the back of her The window seat passenger gets the wall to lean against, and the aisle seat passenger gets extra leg room and easier access to get up, but the middle seat has no advantage, so that passenger should have access to both armrests, for comfort said Sirimanna. Overhead bin space is not assigned to seats, but belongs to the plane, and snagging a spot for your stuff can be another pain. Passengers might not feel they should need to, but placing items at your feet can help. If you do use an overhead compartment, don't fill the bin just for yourself, and ask before you move around anyone else's bags, said Pepper. When it comes to noise, make sure your headphones are at a reasonable volume and not something others can hear, too. Avoid strong fragrances, since people can have allergies or other sensitivities. Removing shoes on a plane can be uncomfortable for those around you. If you anticipate needing to loosen your shoes for comfort or medical reasons, wear socks and shoes that can still be worn, while also feeling loose.
Yahoo
31-03-2025
- Yahoo
Ontario judge condemns WestJet's attempt to include gag order in settlement offer
Andrew Douglas says he was just fighting for compensation when he took WestJet to small claims court — instead, the dispute has resulted in what's believed to be a landmark decision that can now be pointed to by all air travel passengers battling it out with the airlines. "Beware of seniors, they have a lot of time on their hands," the 72-year-old Ottawa man told Go Public, referring to the fact that his dispute with WestJet began more than three years ago. In her decision on costs earlier this month, the judge condemned WestJet's insistence that Douglas sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) in order to get compensation the airline owed him after he was incorrectly not allowed to board a flight to Cuba. Nobody in Canada tracks how often NDAs are used, but experts in the airline industry say imposing confidentiality clauses in settlement offers is an increasingly common tactic, which is why this recent decision is so important. An advocate for air passengers says the decision sends an important directive to the airline industry. "Finally, a judge calls out an airline for trying to gag passengers," said Gábor Lukács, founder and president of the Air Passenger Rights group. "That is a stern warning … they cannot get away with it." How it began Douglas's tale began on Jan. 31, 2022, at the Ottawa airport. He was headed to Cuba — a country he travels to regularly, visiting friends and bringing supplies to people in need, like the medicine he brought with him on a trip in January. "I brought a lot of acetaminophen and ibuprofen because that's hard to find," he a WestJet agent told him — incorrectly — that he wasn't allowed to check in, because he couldn't provide proof of a recent negative Covid test. Douglas knew the regulations had recently changed, so he'd brought with him a printed page from the website of the Cuba Tourist Board of Canada, clearly stating that no Covid test was required for Canadians going to Cuba. But neither the WestJet agent nor a supervisor who was called in would listen when Douglas pleaded his case, or check the website themselves. The real burn, said Douglas, was that WestJet refused to refund his $410 ticket — offering instead to refund his baggage fees and give him a credit to take a later trip with the airline. "I don't want flyer points," said Douglas. "I am not flying WestJet again." Andrew Douglas stands in front of the National Capitol building in Havana, Cuba, on a recent trip. (Submitted by Andrew Douglas) Turned away at the airport, he returned home and sent the airline a request for a refund via a registered demand letter — a formal, written request, asking the company to fulfil a legal obligation before he potentially took legal action. WestJet did not reply, so Douglas felt he had no option but to file in small claims court. "Who was ever going to believe that an airline would simply turn a passenger away for no good reason?" he said. Because he had no legal background, Douglas headed to the Ottawa public library and found a book written by a former small claims court judge, explaining how a member of the public can take a case to court. Before heading to the Ottawa airport, Douglas printed off these rules from the Cuba Tourist Board of Canada, showing no negative Covid test was required for his travel. (Raphaël Tremblay/CBC) He also relied on information provided to him by Lukács, of Air Passenger Rights. He filed his case in March 2022. WestJet asks for gag order Five months later, Douglas received an email from WestJet, offering to pay $790 in compensation for his airfare and another flight he missed because he couldn't take the trip. But the offer came with a hitch — the requirement that he sign an NDA — so Douglas declined the offer. Before a small claims case goes to court, there's a settlement conference — where both sides try to come to an agreement before a judge, potentially avoiding a trial. At that hearing, WestJet again offered Douglas a refund of $790 and again required he sign an NDA — so once again, he turned down the offer. WestJet made two more offers, slightly increasing the amount of the refund each time, but still requiring that Douglas keep silent. So he turned those down, too. One week before the trial was set to begin, WestJet upped its offer again — to $1,298 — still requiring a gag order and warning Douglas that there would likely be consequences if he lost in court. "Should you choose not to accept this offer and proceed unnecessarily to trial, we expect to receive instructions from our client to seek penalties and costs against you," wrote Anika Garlick, the lawyer for WestJet. Still, Douglas refused to settle. "It's not about the money. It's the point of the argument," he said. "This buying silence has to stop." Gábor Lukács, founder of Air Passenger Rights, says the court decision sends a strong message to airlines — they cannot force passengers to be silent in order to get compensation. (Galen McRae/CBC) Air passenger advocate Lukács says he sees nothing wrong with people settling without going to court, as long as the offer is reasonable and, importantly, that passengers are at liberty to speak about what happened. "Because we are talking about money that is owed to them under law," said Lukács. "It is not a goodwill gesture. It's not a handout … It is simply what is owed the passenger — and there should be no confidentiality whatsoever there." Judge condemns WestJet In her ruling, the judge ordered WestJet to refund Douglas for his airfare and costs he incurred travelling to and from the airport and filing his lawsuit. She also condemned WestJet for trying to impose a confidentiality clause, saying it was "problematic," a "serious defect" and that there should not be "strings attached" to receive a "long-overdue refund." She wrote that WestJet would not be asking for an NDA unless there was a financial advantage to it, and that the advantage was apparently "worth the trouble and expense of a trial to the defendant not to offer settlement without it." "This decision sends a clear message to the airlines that if an amount is undisputed, the airline should pay it," said Lukács. A lawyer who has studied the use of confidentiality clauses within Canada's air travel industry calls the decision "well-reasoned" and a win for air travel passengers. "This decision could indeed change the way airlines litigate — and for the better," said Paul Daly, Research Chair in Administrative Law and Governance at the University of Ottawa. "It would mean more information in the public domain." Douglas, who waited almost three years for his day in court, said he was pleased with the judge's harsh criticism of WestJet's use of an NDA. "It's pretty strong language," he said. "But I feel it's justified the way I was mistreated." The judge's decision on costs called out WestJet's use of a confidentiality clause. (Raphaël Tremblay/CBC) The judge also slapped the airline with an additional $410 penalty for withholding money it owed the 72-year-old plaintiff for so long — a delay she found "particularly vexing." "A penalty in a lesser amount would be insufficient to deter the defendant from repeating this conduct in other cases," she wrote, chastising WestJet for not paying up for more than two years and seven months after the start of litigation. "Courts cannot condone hardball tactics," wrote the judge. "Especially in circumstances where there is a power imbalance between a corporate litigant (here the second largest airline in Canada) and an individual." All told, the judge ordered WestJet to pay Douglas $2,118 — plus interest from day one of the dispute. WestJet declined an interview request from Go Public. In a statement, an airline spokesperson wrote that confidentiality clauses are "fundamental to ensuring that both parties can transparently explore both the unique circumstances and the unique solution which may be available and lead to common ground." Douglas wants 'denied boarding' definition changed Meanwhile, Douglas hopes to help strengthen other protections for air travellers. He's made a submission to the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) regarding the definition of "denied boarding" in proposed changes to the Air Passenger Protection Regulations. As it stands, travellers can only file for "denied boarding" if they can prove a plane is overbooked (a practice also known as "bumping"). That's why Douglas couldn't file a complaint about his WestJet dispute with the CTA and had to go to court — his situation wasn't covered under the current regulations. He wants Canada to align with the European Union's definition of "denial of boarding" that would limit a carrier's ability to deny compensation to passengers with a confirmed reservation only if they show up late for check-in, don't have valid travel documents, or refuse to comply with health, safety or security requirements. "Then in instances like mine, where you're just wrongly refused transport, you would be compensated exactly the same as if the plane had been overbooked," said Douglas. The Air Passenger Rights group has also submitted to the CTA a 27-page analysis of the proposed "denied boarding" regulation — it, too, is calling for similar protections provided in Europe. A strong message to the airline industry Lukács says he will post Douglas's small claims court victory on his group's Facebook page, so others can use it to fight gag orders in disputes against airlines. He calls it a strong message to the entire airline industry to smarten up. "Wasting for years the passengers' time, the legal system's time, judges, clerks, tens of thousands of dollars in public money for a $1,000 dispute," Lukács said. "That is not how we want to use our public resources in Canada." Douglas says he's proud to be behind a case that will likely help a lot of other frustrated airline passengers. But he says no one "in their right mind" would spend three years just to win back what they're owed. "Don't go to court for money," he said. "Go to court because they're really treating you badly. And you deserve justice." Submit your story ideas Go Public is an investigative news segment on CBC-TV, radio and the web. We tell your stories, shed light on wrongdoing and hold the powers that be accountable. If you have a story in the public interest, or if you're an insider with information, contact gopublic@ with your name, contact information and a brief summary. All emails are confidential until you decide to Go Public. Read more stories by Go Public. Read about our hosts.
CBC
31-03-2025
- Business
- CBC
Ontario judge condemns WestJet's attempt to include gag order in settlement offer
Social Sharing Andrew Douglas says he was just fighting for compensation when he took WestJet to small claims court — instead, the dispute has resulted in what's believed to be a landmark decision that can now be pointed to by all air travel passengers battling it out with the airlines. "Beware of seniors, they have a lot of time on their hands," the 72-year-old Ottawa man told Go Public, referring to the fact that his dispute with WestJet began more than three years ago. In her decision on costs earlier this month, the judge condemned WestJet's insistence that Douglas sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) in order to get compensation the airline owed him after he was incorrectly not allowed to board a flight to Cuba. Nobody in Canada tracks how often NDAs are used, but experts in the airline industry say imposing confidentiality clauses in settlement offers is an increasingly common tactic, which is why this recent decision is so important. Got a story you want investigated? Contact Erica and the Go Public team here An advocate for air passengers says the decision sends an important directive to the airline industry. "Finally, a judge calls out an airline for trying to gag passengers," said Gábor Lukács, founder and president of the Air Passenger Rights group. "That is a stern warning … they cannot get away with it." How it began Douglas's tale began on Jan. 31, 2022, at the Ottawa airport. He was headed to Cuba — a country he travels to regularly, visiting friends and bringing supplies to people in need, like the medicine he brought with him on a trip in January. "I brought a lot of acetaminophen and ibuprofen because that's hard to find," he said. WATCH | Judge criticizes WestJet for insisting customer sign non-disclosure agreement: Judge calls out WestJet for trying to muzzle customer | Go Public 6 hours ago Duration 2:28 In a ruling that air passenger advocates say could change how airlines settle disputes, a judge criticized WestJet for insisting a customer sign a non-disclosure agreement in order to receive a refund. But a WestJet agent told him — incorrectly — that he wasn't allowed to check in, because he couldn't provide proof of a recent negative Covid test. Douglas knew the regulations had recently changed, so he'd brought with him a printed page from the website of the Cuba Tourist Board of Canada, clearly stating that no Covid test was required for Canadians going to Cuba. But neither the WestJet agent nor a supervisor who was called in would listen when Douglas pleaded his case, or check the website themselves. The real burn, said Douglas, was that WestJet refused to refund his $410 ticket — offering instead to refund his baggage fees and give him a credit to take a later trip with the airline. "I don't want flyer points," said Douglas. "I am not flying WestJet again." Turned away at the airport, he returned home and sent the airline a request for a refund via a registered demand letter — a formal, written request, asking the company to fulfil a legal obligation before he potentially took legal action. WestJet did not reply, so Douglas felt he had no option but to file in small claims court. "Who was ever going to believe that an airline would simply turn a passenger away for no good reason?" he said. Because he had no legal background, Douglas headed to the Ottawa public library and found a book written by a former small claims court judge, explaining how a member of the public can take a case to court. He also relied on information provided to him by Lukács, of Air Passenger Rights. He filed his case in March 2022. WestJet asks for gag order Five months later, Douglas received an email from WestJet, offering to pay $790 in compensation for his airfare and another flight he missed because he couldn't take the trip. But the offer came with a hitch — the requirement that he sign an NDA — so Douglas declined the offer. Before a small claims case goes to court, there's a settlement conference — where both sides try to come to an agreement before a judge, potentially avoiding a trial. At that hearing, WestJet again offered Douglas a refund of $790 and again required he sign an NDA — so once again, he turned down the offer. WestJet made two more offers, slightly increasing the amount of the refund each time, but still requiring that Douglas keep silent. So he turned those down, too. One week before the trial was set to begin, WestJet upped its offer again — to $1,298 — still requiring a gag order and warning Douglas that there would likely be consequences if he lost in court. "Should you choose not to accept this offer and proceed unnecessarily to trial, we expect to receive instructions from our client to seek penalties and costs against you," wrote Anika Garlick, the lawyer for WestJet. Still, Douglas refused to settle. "It's not about the money. It's the point of the argument," he said. "This buying silence has to stop." Air passenger advocate Lukács says he sees nothing wrong with people settling without going to court, as long as the offer is reasonable and, importantly, that passengers are at liberty to speak about what happened. "Because we are talking about money that is owed to them under law," said Lukács. "It is not a goodwill gesture. It's not a handout … It is simply what is owed the passenger — and there should be no confidentiality whatsoever there." Judge condemns WestJet In her ruling, the judge ordered WestJet to refund Douglas for his airfare and costs he incurred travelling to and from the airport and filing his lawsuit. She also condemned WestJet for trying to impose a confidentiality clause, saying it was "problematic," a "serious defect" and that there should not be "strings attached" to receive a "long-overdue refund." She wrote that WestJet would not be asking for an NDA unless there was a financial advantage to it, and that the advantage was apparently "worth the trouble and expense of a trial to the defendant not to offer settlement without it." "This decision sends a clear message to the airlines that if an amount is undisputed, the airline should pay it," said Lukács. A lawyer who has studied the use of confidentiality clauses within Canada's air travel industry calls the decision "well-reasoned" and a win for air travel passengers. "This decision could indeed change the way airlines litigate — and for the better," said Paul Daly, Research Chair in Administrative Law and Governance at the University of Ottawa. "It would mean more information in the public domain." Douglas, who waited almost three years for his day in court, said he was pleased with the judge's harsh criticism of WestJet's use of an NDA. "It's pretty strong language," he said. "But I feel it's justified the way I was mistreated." The judge also slapped the airline with an additional $410 penalty for withholding money it owed the 72-year-old plaintiff for so long — a delay she found "particularly vexing." "A penalty in a lesser amount would be insufficient to deter the defendant from repeating this conduct in other cases," she wrote, chastising WestJet for not paying up for more than two years and seven months after the start of litigation. "Courts cannot condone hardball tactics," wrote the judge. "Especially in circumstances where there is a power imbalance between a corporate litigant (here the second largest airline in Canada) and an individual." All told, the judge ordered WestJet to pay Douglas $2,118 — plus interest from day one of the dispute. WestJet declined an interview request from Go Public. In a statement, an airline spokesperson wrote that confidentiality clauses are "fundamental to ensuring that both parties can transparently explore both the unique circumstances and the unique solution which may be available and lead to common ground." Douglas wants 'denied boarding' definition changed Meanwhile, Douglas hopes to help strengthen other protections for air travellers. He's made a submission to the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) regarding the definition of "denied boarding" in proposed changes to the Air Passenger Protection Regulations. As it stands, travellers can only file for "denied boarding" if they can prove a plane is overbooked (a practice also known as "bumping"). That's why Douglas couldn't file a complaint about his WestJet dispute with the CTA and had to go to court — his situation wasn't covered under the current regulations. He wants Canada to align with the European Union's definition of "denial of boarding" that would limit a carrier's ability to deny compensation to passengers with a confirmed reservation only if they show up late for check-in, don't have valid travel documents, or refuse to comply with health, safety or security requirements. "Then in instances like mine, where you're just wrongly refused transport, you would be compensated exactly the same as if the plane had been overbooked," said Douglas. The Air Passenger Rights group has also submitted to the CTA a 27-page analysis of the proposed "denied boarding" regulation — it, too, is calling for similar protections provided in Europe. A strong message to the airline industry Lukács says he will post Douglas's small claims court victory on his group's Facebook page, so others can use it to fight gag orders in disputes against airlines. He calls it a strong message to the entire airline industry to smarten up. "Wasting for years the passengers' time, the legal system's time, judges, clerks, tens of thousands of dollars in public money for a $1,000 dispute," Lukács said. "That is not how we want to use our public resources in Canada." Douglas says he's proud to be behind a case that will likely help a lot of other frustrated airline passengers. But he says no one "in their right mind" would spend three years just to win back what they're owed. "Don't go to court for money," he said. "Go to court because they're really treating you badly. And you deserve justice."
