The fact that hot coffee spills on the passenger of an airplane no longer seems to be a rare thing, for the Court of Justice of the European Union: December 19, 2019 (C-532/18), at the request of the Austrian Supreme Court, it ruled on a case of this kind: a cup of coffee, placed on a shelf, had overturned on a little girl, causing her second degree burns.
The Court ruled that it was an “accident” within the meaning of the Montreal convention – as requested by the girl’s father, and contrary to what the airline company maintained, for which the notion of “accident” was limited to the case where a risk inherent in air transport occurred. His judgment had made it possible to compensate the father of the child.
On December 18, 2016, an entire coffee pot scalded a passenger, Mr. X, also an Austrian, on a flight operated by Austrian Airline from Tel Aviv (Israel) to Vienna (Austria). The coffee maker fell from the cart that the flight attendants were circulating, in the middle of the rows of seats.
But, unlike the girl’s father, Mr. X did not take legal action within the two-year period provided for by the Montreal Convention and he disputed that this international treaty could apply to his case. He asked to benefit from Austrian law, which provides for a limitation period of three years, and claimed 10,196 euros in compensation for his damage.
Limitation period
Mr. X admittedly admitted that the fall of the coffee maker constituted an “accident”, within the meaning of article 17 of the agreement. But he maintained that the worsening of his injuries was due to an autonomous cause: the fact that the staff did not give him cold water to treat the burn, but only ointment – which the company disputes.
The Austrian Supreme Court has decided to question the Luxembourg Court again: the first aid provided following an accident ” should they be considered as part of the same accidental event as the harmful event, when they have caused bodily injuries distinct from the consequences of the accident proper »?
IJanuary 12, 2023the Cypriot Advocate General Nicholas Emiliou answers in the affirmative: the “accidental” fall of the coffee maker must be considered legally as having “caused” the bodily injuries: without it, there would have been no damage, and the burns, then non-existent, could not have been subsequently “aggravated”.
On July 6, 2023 (C‑510/21), the Court of Justice followed suit: it ruled that a “set of intrinsically linked events which follow one another, without interruption, in space and time”, should be considered as “constituting one and the same “accident”, within the meaning of the agreement”.
You have 14.64% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.