Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Thirsty for a Verdict: Australian Court Confirms That Dehydration Is Not an Accident Under Montreal Convention 1999

Thirsty for a Verdict: Australian Court Confirms That Dehydration Is Not an Accident Under... Thirsty for a Verdict: Australian Court Confirms That Dehydration Is Not an Accident Under Montreal Convention 1999 * ** *** James COOPER , Ankush CHAUHAN & Olivia PUCHALSKI The Supreme Court of Victoria has recently dismissed a claim by a passenger who fainted and fractured her ankle during an Emirates flight, which she alleged was caused by the airline’s failure to serve her with water upon request. The Court, in reaching its determination, had to consider the question of what amounts to an ‘accident’ under the Montreal Convention 1999. 1 FACTUAL BACKGROUND In Di Falco v. Emirates (No 2) [2019], the plaintiff alleged that in March 2015 she was injured from a fall that occurred while she wasapassengeraboardanEmiratesflightfrom Melbourne, Australia to Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The plaintiff gave evidence that she had requested water from the cabin crew four times during the course of the flight because she had felt dehydrated, but had been denied this request on all four occasions. She subsequently fainted on her way to the bathroom, sustaining serious injury. Before reaching security and prior to boarding the aircraft operating her flight, the plaintiff had consumed some water from her own water bottle. The plaintiff boarded http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Air & Space Law Kluwer Law International

Thirsty for a Verdict: Australian Court Confirms That Dehydration Is Not an Accident Under Montreal Convention 1999

Air & Space Law , Volume 45 (3): 6 – Jun 1, 2020
Download PDF
6 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/kluwer-law-international/thirsty-for-a-verdict-australian-court-confirms-that-dehydration-is-NXZ5D7fhzR

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Kluwer Law International
Copyright
Copyright © 2020 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands
ISSN
0927-3379
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Thirsty for a Verdict: Australian Court Confirms That Dehydration Is Not an Accident Under Montreal Convention 1999 * ** *** James COOPER , Ankush CHAUHAN & Olivia PUCHALSKI The Supreme Court of Victoria has recently dismissed a claim by a passenger who fainted and fractured her ankle during an Emirates flight, which she alleged was caused by the airline’s failure to serve her with water upon request. The Court, in reaching its determination, had to consider the question of what amounts to an ‘accident’ under the Montreal Convention 1999. 1 FACTUAL BACKGROUND In Di Falco v. Emirates (No 2) [2019], the plaintiff alleged that in March 2015 she was injured from a fall that occurred while she wasapassengeraboardanEmiratesflightfrom Melbourne, Australia to Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The plaintiff gave evidence that she had requested water from the cabin crew four times during the course of the flight because she had felt dehydrated, but had been denied this request on all four occasions. She subsequently fainted on her way to the bathroom, sustaining serious injury. Before reaching security and prior to boarding the aircraft operating her flight, the plaintiff had consumed some water from her own water bottle. The plaintiff boarded

Journal

Air & Space Law – Kluwer Law International

Published: Jun 1, 2020

There are no references for this article.