AN AIR PASSENGER’S UNFORTUNATE FALL DOWN THE STAIRS boarding bridge used for boarding and a patella fracture caused by this fall. The Federal Court assumed an injury due to an accident as a sudden event based on an external influence. In Labbadia v. Alitailia,19 the plaintiff had been using the passenger stairs at the rear exit of the aircraft when it was snowing and – before he could hold on to the handrail – slipped on the stairs, which were slippery because of the snow, and fell headfirst. Again, the court examined whether there was an unusual or unexpected external event. While wintry weather with snowfall was not unusual or unexpected even in Milan, the plaintiff should have expected a snow-free, covered passenger staircase. The use of an uncovered staircase was therefore to be regarded as an unusual, external event that had caused the injury. The court could not find contributory negligence because the plaintiff had not immediately held on to the handrail. The most recent decision on a passenger falling down a staircase, prior to the CJEU ruling in JR v Austrian Airlines, probably was Moore v. British Airways.20 Like in the CJEU case, the staircase was neither slippery nor dirty, but its last step (i.e. the distance to the ground) was about twice as high as all the preceding steps and significantly higher than required by relevant, albeit non-binding, standards, which is why the plaintiff lost her balance and fell. The trial court dismissed the claim on summary judgment because the plaintiff had offered no evidence that such a design of the staircase was unusual or that the staircase differed in that respect from commonly used passenger stairs. The Court of Appeal pointed out that for an accident to occur, there had to be an unexpected or unusual event affecting the passenger from the outside, whereas an injury attributable to the passenger’s own reaction to the ordinary, normal and expectable operation of an aircraft could not be considered to have been caused by an accident. Whether an event qualified as ‘unexpected’ had to be assessed from the objective point of view of an averagely experienced, reasonable passenger. As it could not be ruled out that a reasonable jury would reach this conclusion, because non-binding standards could also be decisive for the expectations of an average passenger, the dismissal of the claim ordered by the court of first instance was set aside. In all the cases referred to, there was either an external circumstance or – where such external circumstance could not be established – an accident was denied as a prerequisite for a claim under the Warsaw or Montreal Convention. 19 High Court of Justice for England and Wales (Queen’s Bench Division) 31.07.2019, Labbadia v. Alitalia, [2019] EWHC 2103. 20 US Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit 29.04.2022, Moore v. British Airways, No. 21-1037.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==