MC99: German Supreme Court annuls CA judgment that rejected passenger claim who slipped on passenger bridge

The German Supreme Court (BGH) annulled and remanded a judgment of the Court of Appeal (CA) of Düsseldorf that rejected a claim of a passenger who slipped on the passenger bridge during the disembarkation process.

The passenger had booked a flight from Düsseldorf to Hamburg. As he was stepping in the passenger boarding bridge, he slipped on a wet point and suffered patella fracture. He sued claiming compensation for medical expenses, loss of income and mental injury, according to Art. 17(1) of the 1999 Montreal Convention and Arts 1 and 3 of the Regulation (EC) No 2027/1997, which incorporates the MC into EU law regarding passenger and baggage claims. The Court of First Instance and the CA of Düsseldorf rejected his claim on the grounds that his injury was not the outcome of a risk inherent to air travel. According to established German case law on the 1999 MC (and its predecessor the 1929 Warsaw Convention), passenger injuries caused by an “accident” under Art. 17(1) MC are compensated, only if the accident was caused by a risk inherent to air travel (Luftfahrtbezogenheit). Otherwise, the passenger may be entitled to compensation under domestic law.

The BGH annulled the appellate judgment, underlining that Art. 17(1) MC covers accidents that occur also during embarkation and disembarkation. An accident at the passenger bridge under the circumstances of the case, falls under this category and is due to inherent risks of air travel. Therefore, the case was remanded to the CA to further clarify the facts of the case, especially if there was comparative negligence of the passenger.

The full text of the judgment has not been published yet. An official press release (in German) can be found here.