Airlines are required to compensate passengers on international flights for flight delays and cancellations, denied boardings and lost or damaged baggage, the Supreme Court of Canada confirmed Friday.
The unanimous decision is being hailed as a victory for consumer rights.
“It’s a landmark consumer protection decision, apart from being a total vindication for air travelers,” said John Lawford, a lawyer who represented several organizations that intervened in the case.
“It’s a nice light in the darkness for consumers that have been facing lots of challenges lately with inflation and problems post-Covid. It’s the right direction, and it’s a real positive step.”
The case centred on whether parts of Canada’s Air Passenger Protection Regulations that apply to international flights conflict with the Montreal Convention, an international treaty that outlines airlines’ responsibilities and passengers’ rights in international travel. Canada signed the convention in 2001 and it has been incorporated into Canadian law. Â
The regulations only apply when flight changes or baggage loss or damage are caused by factors under an airline’s control. They do not apply if an airline made these decisions to protect passengers’ safety.
The airline industry argued that the regulations, which were enacted in 2019, contradict the Montreal Convention and were therefore invalid.
The Supreme Court upheld the regulations.
The regulations provide a standard for determining how much compensation passengers are entitled to receive. Under the regulations, two passengers who experience the same problem will receive the same amount of money. An individual’s specific harm or inconvenience is not considered.
The regulations “do not seek to measure a passenger’s loss,” Justice Malcolm Rowe wrote for the court.
“The Regulations do not tie the compensation to harm or inconvenience, rather they mandate compensation for delay, cancellation or denial of boarding based on the amount of time by which a passenger’s arrival at their ultimate destination is delayed,” the decision says.
The court said that the regulations therefore do not contradict the Montreal Convention, which enables individuals to seek compensation based on the wrongs they individually suffered.Â
The Canadian Transportation Agency, a quasi-judicial tribunal that enforces transport regulations, said the decision brings “certainty” to Canada’s air passenger protection rules.
“There are no changes to the rights of air passengers or the responsibilities of airlines as a result of this decision,” the agency said in a statement to Canadian Affairs.
Not all passengers whose flights are delayed or have their baggage lost or damaged receive compensation. Passengers must file complaints with the Canada Transportation Agency and have their claims approved to receive compensation.
The agency recently announced it is facing a backlog of more than 71,000 unresolved complaints.
Giving consumers power
Compensation models like the one set out for airlines in Canada’s regulations have become more common in recent years, says Lawford. Financial services and the telecommunications industry have similar systems, he says.
“It’s a matter of giving consumers some power, in some way, to signal to the companies that their behaviour isn’t up to standard,” says Lawford.
Lawford says confirming the authority of these passenger regulations is especially important for passengers who have low incomes or face challenges when flying due to disabilities. He represented the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, the National Pensioners Federation and the Council of Canadians with Disabilities in the case.
“[Travelling] can really be hard on people on lower income or facing disabilities in particular,” he said. The compensation provided by the regulations can be especially helpful for them.
Other passenger advocates applauded the decision, while saying more needs to be done to protect Canadian passengers.
“The decision upholds Canadian passengers’ right to be treated fairly,” said Gábor Lukács, president of the advocacy organization Air Passenger Rights, who was an intervener in the case.
“I am grateful that the court rejected the airlines’ attempt to close the door and nail it shut on passenger protection in Canada,” he said in a press release.
But Canada still needs to strengthen its air passenger rights, says Lukács.Â
The airline industry is disappointed in the decision but grateful for the clarity it provides, says Pierre Bienvenu, a lawyer who represented the airline industry in the case.
“It’s guidance that is welcome,” he said.
