Airline cannot invoke limited liability for lost luggage under Warsaw Convention if claim check does not contain required information

Law Reporter, Sep 1999

AVIATION

Airline cannot invoke limited liability for lost luggage under Warsaw Convention if claim check does not contain required information.

Spannerv.United Airlines, Inc., 177 F.3d 1173(9th Cir. 1999).

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an airline's liability for lost luggage is not limited under the Warsaw Convention, 49 U.S.C. 40105, which outlines remedies available to international travelers bringing tort claims against airlines-unless the baggage check bears the weight and number of bags.

Here, a passenger filed suit against an airline for the full value of lost luggage. The airline argued that its liability was limited to $9.07 per pound of luggage pursuant to the convention.

Plaintiff countered that the airline could not limit its liability because it had not issued a baggage check indicating the weight and number of plaintiff's bags as required by the convention. Under Article 4, the convention's limited liability provisions do not apply when airlines fail to issue such a baggage check to a passenger.

Plaintiff also claimed that he had not received notice that the convention applied to his flight.

The trial court granted defendant summary judgment.

The court agreed that a proper baggage check should have been issued but reasoned that failure to provide one was merely a technical violation of the convention that did not expose an airline to liability for the full cost of the luggage.

Also, plaintiff had not been prejudiced by the failure, the court said, because he had received notice of the convention on his airline ticket and because defendant had agreed to pay him as if his bag had weighed 70 pounds, the maximum permitted for damage claims.

Reversing, the Ninth Circuit strictly construed the treaty's requirement of a weight and number notation on the baggage check. Limited liability is foreclosed, the court said, when this requirement has not been met. Citing case law, the court also noted it is impermissible to read into the treaty a condition that recovery of full value is only available when a passenger is prejudiced by the failure to provide a proper baggage check.

Here, the court said defendant had argued that the required information was handwritten on plaintiff's boarding pass or on his combination plane ticket/baggage check and he had been notified that the convention applied because this information was printed on his plane ticket. This is nevertheless insufficient to limit an airline's liability, the court said, noting that some or all of this documentation is taken from passengers as they board a plane.

Accordingly, the court concluded that summary judgment for defendant had been improper.

Plaintiff's Counsel:

Robert A. Spanner, Menlo Park, Cal.

[ Comment: In Mingtai Fire &Marine Ins. Co. v. United Parcel Serv., 177 F.3d 1142 (9th Cir. 1999), plaintiff sued an air carrier for losing computer chips worth about $83,000 en route from Taiwan to the United States. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that China's status as a signatory of the Warsaw Convention is insufficient to bind Taiwan to the convention's terms. Consequently, defendant's liability was limited to the $100 released value specified in its air waybill.]