Labbadia v Alitalia (Societa Aerea Italiana SPA)

For liability under Article 17(1) of the Montreal Convention 1999, the passenger must show bodily injury caused by an event occurring during embarkation or disembarkation. An accident is an event which is unusual, unexpected or untoward from the passenger’s perspective and external to the passenger. Weather may be a state of affairs rather than an event, but a positive operational decision to use uncovered, contaminated aircraft stairs can constitute an event. Acts and omissions may combine to create that event where they depart from the normal operation of the aircraft. The court must apply the Convention autonomously and without allowing the merits of the injury or alleged negligence to distort interpretation. No reduction was made for contributory negligence where the passenger merely followed the disembarkation process.

The claimant, aged 72 at the time, fell while descending aircraft stairs after disembarking from a flight from London to Milan in snow. He sustained significant shoulder and pelvic injuries and claimed damages from the carrier under Article 17(1) of the Montreal Convention 1999.

The court determined the mechanism of the fall, whether it was an accident within Article 17(1), whether the claimant was partly responsible under Article 20, the extent of his injuries, and quantum. The central issue was whether the fall resulted from an event that was unusual, unexpected and external to him.

1. Liability under Article 17(1). The claimant established bodily injury caused by an accident occurring during disembarkation. The Convention applied exclusively, and domestic concepts of negligence, fault and reasonable care did not determine liability.
2. Meaning of accident. The court adopted a natural, flexible and purposive interpretation. The relevant questions were: whether there was an event; whether it was unusual, unexpected or untoward from the claimant’s perspective; and whether it was external to him. The accident is the cause of the injury, not the injury itself.
3. Snow and adverse weather were, in themselves, a state of affairs and were not unusual or unexpected in Milan during February. However, the use of uncovered stairs while snow remained on them was a positive operational decision. It involved a combination of acts and omissions, including aligning the stairs and authorising disembarkation. The stairs did not comply with the airport operating manual and the event was outside the normal operation of the aircraft.
4. The event was unusual and unexpected from the claimant’s perspective. He had no reason to expect the stairs to be slippery from compacted snow. It was also external to him. The fall therefore constituted an accident under Article 17(1).
5. The claim for partial exoneration under Article 20 failed. The claimant did not cause or contribute to his injuries by descending the stairs without immediately taking the handrail; he was following the defendant’s disembarkation process.
6. The claimant succeeded on liability and recovered £106,344 excluding interest. This included damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity, past care and treatment, and future care and treatment. Future physiotherapy in Italy was disallowed because it was no longer therapeutically necessary, although probable future hip and shoulder surgery and associated care were allowed. The parties were directed to agree interest and the judgment sum.