Latest news with #MontrealConvention
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Woman to get 1.2L from airline for lost baggage
Mumbai: Observing that there was mala fide negligence by the Flynas Airline supporting staff as well as officials, a district consumer commission has ordered it to pay Rs 1.25 lakh to a Powai-based woman for a lost bag, along with Rs 10,000 for mental agony. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The complaint was filed by Nupur Rohida. Flynas Airlines, a low-cost Saudi Arabian airline, despite being served, remained absent from the proceedings, leading the commission to proceed ex parte. In an order on May 29, the commission said the airline's actions were not satisfactory in the incident. "The opposite party could have checked the CCTV footage to confirm the incident and could have brought a more factual report on record. However, we do not find any genuine efforts taken by the Opposite Party to confirm the incident to trace the lost bag. The Opposite Party purposely avoided all the logical actions to find the lost bag," the commission said. The commission further said that there are set rules for baggage loss compensations as per the Montreal Convention (1999). "The Montreal Convention…is an international treaty that governs airline liability for passengers and their baggage on international flights. It standardises rules for compensation in cases of baggage loss, delay, or damage," the commission said. Rohida moved the commission in 2025. The incident occurred during a family trip to Turkey in December 2023 and January 2024. Rohida and her family had return flights booked for January 2, 2024, from Istanbul to Riyadh, with a connecting flight to Mumbai on January 3, 2024. At Istanbul airport, the complainant handed over five bags to the airline staff. However, the airline staff mistakenly tagged only four bags, and the fifth bag went onto the conveyor belt without a tag. The complainant immediately brought this error to the attention of the staff at the ticket and baggage counter. The staff then physically gave a bag tag to the complainant, however, the fifth bag was permanently lost.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Flynas ordered to pay Rs 1.25 lakh compensation for lost baggage
NEW DELHI: The Mumbai consumer commission has directed Flynas, a Saudi-based budget airline, to pay over Rs 1.25 lakh in compensation to a passenger for losing her baggage. The commission termed the airline's conduct as 'mala fide negligence' and said it had 'purposely avoided all the logical actions to find the lost bag,' as stated in a recent ruling by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban). The passenger was traveling with her family to Turkey from Mumbai between December 23, 2023, and January 3, 2024. For their return journey, they flew from Istanbul with a connecting flight in Riyadh. At the Istanbul airport, she checked in five bags. According to her account, the airline personnel incorrectly tagged only four bags, whilst the fifth proceeded along the conveyor without proper tagging. Upon notifying the counter staff of this oversight, she received a physical tag accompanied by assurances regarding the delivery of all bags. However, upon arrival in Mumbai, only four bags were retrieved. The passenger attempted numerous communications through various channels, including in-person meetings, electronic correspondence, WhatsApp messages and formal complaints to trace the missing luggage, but received inadequate responses from the airline. Subsequently, she sought intervention from the commission regarding the substandard service and unfair practices demonstrated by the airline. The airline's representatives failed to attend the hearing, resulting in ex-parte proceedings. Upon reviewing the case details, the commission concluded that "there was a mala fide negligence by the Flynas Airlines supporting staff as well as officials who were in communication with the complainant". "The opposite party didn't give any conclusive reply to the complaint raised by the complainant and its actions were not satisfactory in the said incident," it added. The commission highlighted that the airline could have verified the incident through CCTV footage and presented additional factual evidence. "However, we do not find any genuine efforts taken by the opposite party to confirm the incidence to trace the lost bag," it said. The airline "purposely avoided all the logical actions to find the lost bag," the commission added. The Montreal Convention (1999), an international treaty, establishes specific regulations for compensation regarding baggage loss during international flights, governing airline accountability for passengers and their belongings. The aggrieved passenger complied with the prescribed complaint filing procedures, as confirmed by the commission. "However, we have not seen any record which indicates that the airlines has observed the conditions laid down in the Montreal Convention," it continued. The commission noted that whilst the airline had the opportunity to present its defence for the complaint, they chose not to do so. "The opposite party remained absent in the whole proceedings of the case even though they have full knowledge of filing of the present complaint by the complainant," the commission said. "Hence, we have no doubt in our mind about the negligent act of the opposite party/Flynas Airlines. The allegations of the complainant about loss of luggage by Flynas Airlines are genuine,"it added. The commission instructed Flynas Airlines to compensate the complainant with Rs 1.25 lakh for the lost baggage, including six per cent interest from January 15, 2025, until realisation. Additionally, the airline must pay Rs 10,000 as compensation for emotional distress. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 days ago
- Business Standard
Consumer panel directs Flynas Airlines to pay ₹1.25 lakh for lost baggage
A consumer commission here has directed Flynas Airlines, a Saudi Arabian low-cost carrier, to pay a compensation of more than ₹1.25 lakh to a passenger for the loss of her baggage. There was a "mala fide negligence" and the airlines "purposely avoided all the logical actions to find the lost bag," the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban) said in a recent order. The complainant, along with her family, had gone on a trip to Turkiye from Mumbai between December 23, 2023 and January 3, 2024. Their return flight to the city was booked from Istanbul with a connecting flight from Riyadh. The complainant stated that at the Istanbul airport, she handed over five bags for check-in. The airline staff mistakenly tagged only four bags, and the fifth bag went on to the conveyor belt without a tag, she claimed. The mistake was brought to the notice of the staff present at the ticket and baggage counter. The complainant was given a physical tag by the staff with an assurance that they will receive all bags at the arrival destination. However, she received only four bags at Mumbai airport. The complainant made multiple communications through personal meetings, emails, WhatsApp chats and written complaints to locate the lost bag, but got an "unsatisfactory response" from the airlines. Left with no alternative, she approached the commission for the resolution against deficient service and unfair trade practice by the airlines. The opposite party remained absent during the hearing, hence the complaint proceeded ex-parte. The commission, after perusal of all the facts related to the incident, held "there was a mala fide negligence by the Flynas Airlines supporting staff as well as officials who were in communication with the complainant". "The opposite party didn't give any conclusive reply to the complaint raised by the complainant and its actions were not satisfactory in the said incident," it stated. The commission pointed out that the airline could have checked the CCTV footage to confirm the incident and could have brought more factual reports on record. "However, we do not find any genuine efforts taken by the opposite party to confirm the incidence to trace the lost bag," it said. The airline "purposely avoided all the logical actions to find the lost bag," the commission said. There are set rules for baggage loss compensation as per the Montreal Convention (1999), which is an international treaty which governs airline liability for passengers and their baggage on international flights. The commission stated the aggrieved passenger has followed the directions related to filing a complaint. "However, we have not seen any record which indicates that the airlines has observed the conditions laid down in the Montreal Convention," it added. The commission underlined that the airline had an opportunity to submit its defence in the present complaint which it did not avail. "The opposite party remained absent in the whole proceedings of the case even though they have full knowledge of filing of the present complaint by the complainant," it said. "Hence, we have no doubt in our mind about the negligent act of the opposite party/Flynas Airlines. The allegations of the complainant about loss of luggage by Flynas Airlines are genuine," the commission said. The complainant is entitled to claim the cost of goods due to the loss of luggage along with compensation, it said. The commission directed the Flynas Airlines to pay Rs 1.25 lakh to the complainant for the baggage loss with six per cent interest rate from January 15, 2025, till its realisation. The carrier was also asked to pay Rs 10,000 towards compensation for mental agony. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Consumer panel asks Flynas Airlines pay Rs 1.25 lakh to passenger for baggage loss
A consumer commission has directed Flynas Airlines , a Saudi Arabian low-cost carrier, to pay a compensation of more than Rs 1.25 lakh to a passenger for the loss of her baggage. There was a "mala fide negligence" and the airlines "purposely avoided all the logical actions to find the lost bag," the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban) said in a recent order. The complainant, along with her family, had gone on a trip to Turkiye from Mumbai between December 23, 2023 and January 3, 2024. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like War Thunder - Register now for free and play against over 75 Million real Players War Thunder Play Now Undo Their return flight to the city was booked from Istanbul with a connecting flight from Riyadh. The complainant stated that at the Istanbul airport, she handed over five bags for check-in. Live Events The airline staff mistakenly tagged only four bags, and the fifth bag went on to the conveyor belt without a tag, she claimed. The mistake was brought to the notice of the staff present at the ticket and baggage counter. The complainant was given a physical tag by the staff with an assurance that they will receive all bags at the arrival destination. However, she received only four bags at Mumbai airport. The complainant made multiple communications through personal meetings, emails, WhatsApp chats and written complaints to locate the lost bag, but got an "unsatisfactory response" from the airlines. Left with no alternative, she approached the commission for the resolution against deficient service and unfair trade practice by the airlines. The opposite party remained absent during the hearing, hence the complaint proceeded ex-parte. The commission, after perusal of all the facts related to the incident, held "there was a mala fide negligence by the Flynas Airlines supporting staff as well as officials who were in communication with the complainant". "The opposite party didn't give any conclusive reply to the complaint raised by the complainant and its actions were not satisfactory in the said incident," it stated. The commission pointed out that the airline could have checked the CCTV footage to confirm the incident and could have brought more factual reports on record. "However, we do not find any genuine efforts taken by the opposite party to confirm the incidence to trace the lost bag," it said. The airline "purposely avoided all the logical actions to find the lost bag," the commission said. There are set rules for baggage loss compensation as per the Montreal Convention (1999), which is an international treaty which governs airline liability for passengers and their baggage on international flights. The commission stated the aggrieved passenger has followed the directions related to filing a complaint. "However, we have not seen any record which indicates that the airlines has observed the conditions laid down in the Montreal Convention," it added. The commission underlined that the airline had an opportunity to submit its defence in the present complaint which it did not avail. "The opposite party remained absent in the whole proceedings of the case even though they have full knowledge of filing of the present complaint by the complainant," it said. "Hence, we have no doubt in our mind about the negligent act of the opposite party/Flynas Airlines. The allegations of the complainant about loss of luggage by Flynas Airlines are genuine," the commission said. The complainant is entitled to claim the cost of goods due to the loss of luggage along with compensation, it said. The commission directed the Flynas Airlines to pay Rs 1.25 lakh to the complainant for the baggage loss with six per cent interest rate from January 15, 2025, till its realisation. The carrier was also asked to pay Rs 10,000 towards compensation for mental agony.
Vancouver Sun
3 days ago
- Vancouver Sun
Do airlines owe you compensation for turbulence-induced damages? Here's what we found out
This month, two passengers who claimed there should be no upper limit on the amount of compensation Air Canada owes to injured passengers lost their case in an Australian court. The case stems from a July 2019 Air Canada flight from Vancouver to Sydney, Australia. The Canadian Press reported at the time that the flight hit severe turbulence and was forced to divert to Hawaii. Thirty people were sent to hospital, nine in serious condition, some suffering lacerations and injuries to their head, back and neck, emergency first responders in Hawaii said. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. Mother and daughter Renae and Stephanie Evans claimed they suffered spinal and psychological injuries during the flight. They also claimed that Air Canada, in its general rules, waived an upper limit set by an international treaty called the Montreal Convention. The New South Wales Supreme Court initially ruled in favour of the passengers, a decision which was overturned by that state's Court of Appeal. The High Court then unanimously dismissed the passengers' case. The Montreal Convention (or more formally the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air) is an international treaty that was drawn up in 1999 and came into force in 2003. It sets limits for airline liabilities for everything from lost luggage to loss of life. In the case of the latter, it said airlines were liable for up to 100,000 SDR for the bodily injury or death of a passenger. SDR or 'special drawing rights' is an economic unit that can be translated into any local currency; 100,000 SDR is worth about $192,000 Canadian. The amount is examined and may be revised every five years. As of 2024 it stands at 151,880 SDR, equivalent to $277,940 Canadian. The plaintiffs had argued that Air Canada's terms and conditions included the phrase: 'There are no financial limits in respect of death or bodily injury of passengers,' suggesting that the airline was opting out of the limit set by the Montreal Convention. However, Lawson Hennick, founding lawyer at Hennick Law in Markham, Ont., told National Post that on closer reading of the airline's regulations and the lawsuit, the high court's decision makes sense. 'Article 25 of the Montreal Convention expressly permits carriers to agree to higher or unlimited liability,' he said. 'The court acknowledged this, noting that a carrier can raise or even eliminate the threshold at which the no-negligence defence applies.' However, 'the court rejected this position, finding that Air Canada had not clearly waived its right to rely on the no-negligence defence.' Specifically, language in the Montreal Convention note that its liability rules 'supersede and prevail over any provisions of this tariff which may be inconsistent.' Meanwhile, Air Canada's own international tariff rules note that, 'except as otherwise provided herein,' the airline 'reserves all defences available.' Said Hennick: 'In the result, the passengers were unsuccessful in establishing that the carrier had waived the Article 21(2) defence for claims exceeding the maximum liability set out in the Montreal Convention.' Hennick noted that the Montreal Convention, aside from its cap on liabilities, is very open-ended when it comes to injury or loss of life while flying. 'The Montreal Convention says the carrier is liable for damages sustained in the case of death or bodily injury of a passenger upon condition only that the accident which caused the death or injury took place on board the aircraft or in the course of any of the operations of embarking or disembarking,' he said. 'So if you're injured by turbulence, that's considered onboard the aircraft, right? So I would say that would be something that could be compensable.' He added that passengers can sue beyond the limit, 'but if you want to claim it under the Montreal Convention, the benefit of that is all you have to do is prove your injuries.' 'As soon as you start claiming amounts above and beyond that, then they can start putting in defences for negligence. They can start alleging, well, the injury wasn't caused by us, it was caused by a third party, or could have been a result of pre-existing issues, or something other than that. But if you're going to be pursuing the limits under the Montreal Convention, it's a strict liability regime. You just have to show that you're injured on board the aircraft, prove the value of your injuries, and then they'll have to pay it.' One downside, he noted, is that the convention only mentions physical injuries. 'So if it's a purely psychological claim or psychiatric trauma, and you're not physically hurt … you may not be able to recover anything out of the Montreal Convention.' Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
