NCJ Number
63636
Journal
New York University Law Review Volume: 52 Issue: 2 Dated: (1977) Pages: 283-305
Date Published
1977
Length
23 pages
Annotation
THIS NOTE CONSIDERS AMERICAN JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 17 OF THE WARSAW CONVENTION GOVERNING INTERNATIONAL AIR CARRIERS' LIABILITY FOR PASSENGER INJURIES AND ENDORSES A LIMITED CONSTRUCTION.
Abstract
CITING TWO TERRORIST ATTACKS AT HELLENIKON AIRPORT, GREECE, AND AT LOD INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT IN TEL AVIV, ISRAEL, THE AUTHOR ARGUES THAT COURT DECISIONS ARISING OUT OF LITIGATION BY RELATIVES OF THE INJURED PASSENGERS HAS ASSIGNED A WIDER SCOPE TO ARTICLE 17 OF THE WARSAW CONVENTION THAN WAS INTENDED. BOTH THE DAY AND EVANGELINOS DECISIONS FAILED TO IMPLEMENT THE SHARED EXPECTATIONS OF THE PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT AND THEREFORE MISCONSTRUED TWO ESSENTIAL CONCERNS: THAT THE PASSENGER BE EXPOSED TO INHERENT RISKS OF AVIATION AT THE TIME OF INJURY AND THAT THE INJURY OCCUR IN AN AREA WITHIN THE AIRLINE'S SCOPE OF RESPONSIBILITY. HISTORICAL EVIDENCE REVEALS THAT THE WARSAW CONFEREES, RESPONDING TO A RISING INTEREST IN A RISKY INDUSTRY, WERE CONCERNED WITH MAXIMIZING UNIFORMITY IN AN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS AND LIMITING LIABILITY. WARSAW DELEGATES, THEREFORE, REJECTED THE IDEA OF 'AERODROME TO AERODROME' LIABILITY AND FOCUSED UPON TWO FACTORS: PASSENGER EXPOSURE TO INHERENT AVIATION RISKS AT TIME OF INJURY AND AIRLINE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE AREA WHERE INJURIES OCCURRED. IN ADDITION, THE 1966 MONTREAL AGREEMENT CHANGED THE NATURE BUT NOT THE ORIGINAL SCOPE OF CARRIER LIABILITY--IT NEITHER ADDED TO THE TYPES OF INJURIES COVERED NOR BROADENED THE RANGE OF EVENTS WITHIN AIRLINE RESPONSIBILITY. WHILE HIJACKING AND SABOTAGE, THEREFORE, CAN BE CONSIDERED MODERN EXAMPLES OF INHERENT AVIATION RISKS, TERRORIST ATTACKS SUCH AS THOSE AT ATHENS, CANNOT PROPERLY BE CONSIDERED WITHIN THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CARRIER NOR WITHIN THE SCOPE OF ARTICLE 17 LIABILITY AS ORIGINALLY CONCEIVED AND AMENDED. EXTENSIVE FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (AOP)