Airline sues passenger, but maybe it has a point.

Think I have to side with the airline on this one.

Cannot imagine how I would fit $2000+(US) into a single suitcase for a weekend trip.

Hard to image how their 'shopping spree' can be seen as "reasonable and necessary"

I'd like to see the exact wording of what they sent the couple. I thought reasonable was supposed to be enough to tide them over, until the airline had a chance to fins their bag. And I thought there was a dollar limit, and/or an expectation of itemization and documentation of what was lost. Without knowing more, it seems that clearly the stuff bought after their bag was returned was wrong. It shouldn't be punitive.

Allan. please keep us updated on how this turns out.

The rules for lost baggage are laid down in the Montreal Convention (whether a ten minute domestic hop or an ultra long haul flight).

The amount of compensation is limited to 1288 Special Drawing Rights (an IMF currency). Currently 1 SDR = C$1.90.

That allows for reasonable compensation up to the limit. Reasonable depends on the nature of the trip (is it a beach vacation, a funeral or a business conference for instance).
But for a 24 hour delay that would normally be cosmetics and one change of clothing. As clothing can be worn more than once the usual payment would be that 50% of the cost of the clothes is deemed to be reasonable. A monogramed suitcase is taking the proverbial.

Under the Montreal Convention a claim should be submitted within 3 weeks with all proofs of purchase. Without knowing the exact circumstances a payment of C$250 (£130, US$160) feels reasonable.
If the case is lost or damaged the above limit is still adhered to (case and contents), pro rated to the original cost of the lost case and it's age. Typically for a case that had originally cost $1130 a fair and reasonable offer under Montreal would be 10 to 30%- so $110 to $330.
My gut instinct is that Air Canada are substantially in the right here.
I would be surprised if CTA rules over ride Montreal.

@ Allan

Any more concise identification on the passengers trying this scam. Maybe from Palm Beach Florida?

Regards Ron

Addendum

Allan, take solace that, if necessary, this will be adjudicated by a Canadian KB where every judge I know is appointed solely on merit and not political alliance. The airline is onto a winner. Can it collect the money?

I am not surprised in the slightest that Air Canada lost their luggage!

Nice one, Tassie.

I was shocked a few years ago when I returned home from an international trip and my luggage didn’t show up for 4-5 days. I needed to buy a few things because we were only home for 24 hours and then needed to drive to an overnight trip. I bought mostly toiletries and cosmetics, totaling less than $100 and Allianz and AF denied my claim because they said it only applied to flying to a destination not returning home where I should be able to function without my luggage.

Does the CTA ruling mean, in a similar circumstance , I can replace my Rick Steves roller bag with a Louis Vuitton roller bag?

The rules for lost baggage are laid down in the Montreal Convention
(whether a ten minute domestic hop or an ultra long haul flight).

Maybe it's different in the UK, but I looked it up and in Canada the Montreal Convention is not applicable if it's not connected in any way to an international trip.

interesting. i had a similar experience flying on qatar air to india. bag was misplaced and i had to buy a few items including a power supply for my laptop. cost about 130 usd. they found the bag, delivered it a few days later, and offered $50 as compensation. i refused to accept and started a claims process. many forms, emails later they did cough up the $130. lesson learned: don't accept the standard compensation especially if the airline operates/offers flights to and from the USA. The DOT has rules that specifically state that a passenger is not obliged to accept the standard compensation. i copied/pasted/linked the rules and qatar changed its tune.

Allan is right. In this case, the Montreal Convention does not apply. It is only for international flights and the flight here is domestic.

However, since the CTA ordered Air Canada to pay $2000 and not the full $3435 claim, it seems they probably thought the bag request was exorbitant..

Cannot imagine how I would fit $2000+(US) into a single suitcase for a
weekend trip.

I asked my wife that and she started listing off things like makeup, makeup remover, etc. and it quickly went to $500. 2 pairs of shoes is $400. So running around naked and without makeup is already $900 lost.

She'd be more concerned about what the airline and insurance may not compensate. Due to her height (lack of ) and figure, most clothes have to be altered after purchase. Is that covered?

When I started adding up what I had packed in a lost suitcase I was pretty surprised, but it included two suits etc ( we were bound for a wedding, Columbus to Miami) for a 10 day trip. The insurance guy demanded receipts…I asked him if he could provide receipts for the pants, underwear, shirt shoes etc he was wearing while speaking to me. We settled. But buying an $1130 monogramed suitcase? I try to avoid the word scam, but these guys do bring it to mind. When Air France misplaced my luggage for a few days many years later they offered us about $100 apiece to purchase necessities. But I hate clothes shopping and had no intention of spending a minute of my time in Paris looking for underwear and socks. We managed. But that’s us.

@Allan

Elbows up.

A couple of facts on this case. Yes, it is an actual case.

Court List: https://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/court-files-and-decisions/court-files#cont
Toronto. Court No T-3553-24 Application for Judicial Review.

Further Information. https://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/court-files-and-decisions/court-files#cont
Filed 17 December 2024.
So far, no Lawyer listed for the respondent,

This info is free and is bread and butter for those with LLB/JD. A masters (LLM) from say University of London (considered gold standard) broadens ones understanding of issues and likely outcomes.

Tannous as respondent, has not filed a representative barrister.

Rather, seems to me that they have tried the press as a means of pressuring Air Canada to back down.

The claims in the press, and they have gone viral, have yet to be tested in court. So are not fact, but just claims.

Allan, have to catch a plane, may write some more later. I am backing Air Canada. And Canada. Elbows UP.

Regards Ron

Tassie Devil, I am confused. The article is titled: "Air Canada Sues Passengers After Delaying Their Luggage" But since the subject of the story is the passenger tried to defraud the airline, shouldnt the title be more like "Passenger Tries to Defraud Air Canada and gets Sued" Or am I missing something?

@ Allan

Following is my desktop (prima facia) review about your question.

First, Fodors is a travel selling organization. I doubt the journalist has any idea about law. Do not know which paper published first or which then picked up the story to fill copy but probably have similar journos. Never let facts get in the way of a good sensational story to sell papers or digital subscriptions.

I am too lazy to research the background and legislation that created CTA and its responsibilities. But, sorting out passenger squabbles seems low priority against safety of planes in the air and at airports.

Courts and litigation are expensive and time consuming.

In our countries the legislators attempt to give the average person a cheapish method to sort out disputes. Frees up the courts for more important things. Legislation and regulations are designed to allow agencies like CTA to be able to do it cheaper and hopefully quicker, without the pedantic application of law and expensive lawyers. And employ pragmatism.

The relationships between international conventions and sovereign state legislation are best learnt and understood via degree level studies, not hearsay and unqualified opinion. If one does not comprehend, I cannot help.

It seems to me that Air Canada acknowledged that it did deliver the bag late, offered $250 compensation, which Tannous considered inadequate. The CTA up to $2,000. Settle the issue and move on. $2,000 is not a large amount. Can not comment as do not have rational behind this. Remember CTA is a taxpayer organisation, and its managers must be fiscally prudent and balanced in the expenditure of these monies. Pragmatic more than legalistic.

From Air Canada’s position, if this went unchallenged could set a precedent for future cases with similar facts. Obviously, they think CTA bent too far away from them.

Air Canada applied in December 2024 to have this decision reviewed by the Federal Court. Toronto Office T-3553-24. The court papers ask for a review. I do not see any suing taking place. (Actually, one does not expect non court reports/journalist to understand the difference between legal review and litigation. They are probably seeking attention headlines,)

The question under review seems to be the reasonableness of the expenditure made by the Tannous. For sake of argument, we need to assume the amounts quoted in the article are accurate. Do you think they are the actions of someone buying essentials? I could go to Victoria’s Secret and outfit my wife, for those dollars, because I think they are essential for my pleasure.

Tannous appears to be complaining via the media, that he does not have the money for legal representation. Or cannot find a lawyer who thinks he has a reasonable case. The sceptic in me questions the cash for and time to monogram suitcase and other outlays for circa $3,000. Not the purchases of a carpenter and his clerical worker wife. Just guessing on employment. What would the man on the Clapham omnibus conclude?

I understand Air Canada’s requesting a court of review to set a precedent for these incidents. Judgement on equity grounds and reasonableness in the circumstances. Could go against them and have the original decision set aside and a greater compensation in its place.

Elbows up!

Regards Ron

Ron, first of all, "Elbows Up". I just ordered a ballcap with that on it.

Secondly, thanks for your detailed assessment of the luggage topic. I also think that too many reporters are not experts in some topics they cover. Worse, from my point of view are the inflammatory headlines such as what Fodors used. I originally read this story on the CBC app which is a mainstream media source and less likely to use sensational headlines. It's headline was Air Canada was ordered to pay a passenger $2,000 for delayed luggage. Instead, it's taking him to court. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/air-canada-delayed-luggage-court-battle-cta-1.7457480 Sadly when I do a Google search, most media outlets chose to be more sensational making the airline out to be the evil empire and all say Air Canada is suing the passenger. I take it from your comment, that that isn't technically correct?

@ Allan

Elbows up!

@ James yes, the headlines are rubbish. Nothing new there.

@ Allen. The use of the word sue is interesting. Can mean different things to lots of different people. Fact is Air Canada has requested a judicial review of the administrative decision made by CTA. Apologies as my attempt to direct to the Federal Court filing information failed.

Let me try again.

https://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/court-files-and-decisions/court-files#cont

Halfway down the page are four tabs:

Search by Party Name

Search by Court Number

Intellectual Property

Related Cases

We are only interested in the first one.

Search by Party Name. In the dialog box enter: Air Canada and hit submit. Wait for the spinning wheel to finish its search. Be patient. Scroll down. Second case is the Tannous.

To the right are two symbols.

Magnifying glass with + in the centre. Click on this and new screen with popup with details about the filing.

To the right another Magnifying glass. Click on this and another screen pops up. Scroll down to reveal a list in ascending order of documents filed.

These are the only real facts I know about this issue.

My conjecture. When a judge is assigned this case, he/she will decide on how things will proceed. May do a simple desktop review of the papers and facts and issue a written decision. May convene a conference of parties to decide how to continue or any other such action within the jurisdictional authority of the judge.

No indication of intention to sue, yet.

Allan, that is all I can determine. The rest appears to be media beat up and have yet to be recognised as real facts. Rubbish. Pish Posh.

Elbows Up!

Regards Ron