No Need to Know Where Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 is…

to initiate court proceedings.

But where?

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Michael Chatzipanagiotis April 3, 2014, 9:17 am

    Airline liability and judicial jurisdiction in cases of international aviation accidents is governed either by the 1999 Montreal Convention (MC) or by the so called “Warsaw System” (WS), which is based on the 1929 Warsaw Convention (WC) as has been amended by numerous conventions, additional protocols etc. The exact applicable rules depend on the agreed place of departure and the agreed place of arrival of each passenger as these (see Art. 1 MC and Art. 1 WC).
    Both sets of rules designate as competent [see Art. 33 (1) MC and Art. 28 WC]:
    1) the courts of the place where the carrier has its residence (if the carrier is a natural person)
    2) the courts of the place where the carrier has its actual place of business (if the carrier is a legal entity)
    3) the courts of the place where the contract has been concluded
    4) the courts of the agreed place of destination (in case of round trips, the place of destination is the same as the place of departure).

    However, the 1999 MC has added a “5th jurisdiction”, i.e. the place of the passenger’s residence, provided that the carrier is commercially active in that place [Art. 33 (2) MC]. The 5th jurisdiction is intended to cover, i.a., electronic conclude contracts.