which a passenger falls while disembarking on the boarding stairs, provided that the fall was triggered by some unexpected or unusual factor that is external to the passenger. 29 5. The CJEU judgment in the case JR v. Austrian Airlines In its very succinctly reasoned judgment of 02.06.2022, the CJEU refers to its interpretation of the term ‘accident’, already used in the Niki Luftfahrt judgment, as an ‘unforeseen, harmful and involuntary event’ that does not require a connection with an aviation-specifc risk or the operation or movement of the aircraft. This interpretation was in line with the objectives 30 of the Convention to protect the interests of consumers and to provide adequate compensation in accordance with the principle of ful l compensation, while maintaining a fair balance of interests. Accordingly, 31 Article 17(1) of the Montreal Convention had to be interpreted as meaning that a situation in which, for no ascertainable reason, a passenger falls on a mobile stairway set up for the disembarkation of passengers of an aircraft and injures himself or herself constitutes an ‘accident’, within the meaning of that provision, including where the air carrier concerned has not failed to fulfl its diligence and safety obligations in that regard. Although one can agree with the CJEU that a breach of the air carrier's duty of care is not relevant because liability does not depend on any misconduct 32 or negligence on the part of the air carrier, but it is sufcient if the accident occurs on board the aircraft or during boarding or disembarking - but it 33 does not follow from this in itself that a fall ‘for no ascertainable reason’ would also have to be subsumed under the term ‘accident’, as the CJEU does and thus ignores the restriction proposed by the AG. 6. Criticism There is no comprehensible reasoning in the CJEU ruling as to why, contrary to established international case law, the CJEU does not apply the criterion of an external event (or, in the words of the AG, an event ‘triggered by some Ibid., margin 66 and 84. 29 CJEU, judgement of 02.06.2022 in case C-589/20 – JR v. Austrian Airlines, margin 30 20. Ibid., margin 21. 31 Ibid., margin 22. 32 Ibid., margin 23. 33
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==