Unusual but Perhaps Not Unexpected: The Lonely Furrow Ploughed by the CJEU in Respect of an Article 17 ‘Accident’

Abstract

This article considers the interpretation given to the meaning of ‘accident’ in Article 17(1) of the Montreal Convention by Advocate Generals and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). It explains that whilst the former have given opinions consistent with the established jurisprudence of other signatory states (in particular the US Supreme Court’s decision in Air France v. Saks), the latter has not followed suit, but rather has alighted on its own erroneous interpretation of ‘accident’ in this context; which is one inimical to the advancement of international uniformity. Passenger Liability, Article 17, Accident, interpretation, uniformity, Saks, CJEU