- Definition of the word ‘accident’ within the Montreal Convention (GN v ZU (Niki Luftfahrt GmbH)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
Personal Injury analysis: The Court of Justice recently considered the definition of the word ‘accident’ as contained within the Montreal Convention. The court found that the concept of ‘accident’ covers all situations occurring on board an aircraft in which an object used when serving passengers has caused bodily injury to a passenger, without it being necessary to examine whether those situations stem from a hazard typically associated with aviation. Owen Hanna, partner at Keystone Law, explains the background to the case, along with some of the practical implications of the judgment.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial