본문 바로가기
bar_progress

Text Size

Close

Pet Dog Lost in Airplane Cargo Hold... What Is the Airline's Compensation Liability?

Dog Owner Sues Airline for 830,000 Won
EU Court Sides with Airline

The court has ruled that airlines are not obligated to pay additional special compensation even if a pet dog loaded in the airplane cargo hold goes missing. On October 16, Yonhap News reported, citing a ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), the highest court in the European Union, that pets are also considered as baggage. This ruling came as a result of a case involving Iberia Airlines, where a pet dog went missing, at the request of a Spanish court. The court determined that even if a pet dog is lost due to the airline's negligence, only the compensation applicable to general baggage loss can be provided.

Pet Dog Lost in Airplane Cargo Hold... What Is the Airline's Compensation Liability? The court has ruled that airlines are not obligated to pay additional special compensation even if a pet dog loaded in the airplane cargo hold goes missing. The photo is unrelated to the specific content of the article. Pixabay

Previously, in October 2019, a passenger traveling from Buenos Aires, Argentina, to Barcelona, Spain, checked in their pet dog in the cargo hold of an Iberia Airlines flight. This was because the dog's size and weight exceeded the airline's in-cabin pet policy limits. During the process of transferring the transport cage to the cargo hold, the dog escaped and was never found.


The passenger filed a damages lawsuit against Iberia Airlines in a local Spanish court, seeking compensation of 5,000 euros (approximately 826,000 Korean won). Iberia Airlines acknowledged responsibility for the loss. However, the airline argued that, based on the Montreal Convention-which defines the scope of passenger and baggage liability for airlines-compensation could only be provided within the limits applicable to general baggage.


The Spanish court referred the case to the ECJ, asking whether the concept of baggage under the Montreal Convention includes pets. The ECJ sided with the airline, citing, among other reasons, that the passenger did not make a "special declaration" for the pet at check-in. This special declaration, which requires an additional fee, allows for higher compensation in the event of loss or damage.


However, the ECJ's ruling is only advisory in nature. Therefore, the final judgment will be made by the Spanish court currently hearing the case. Some foreign media outlets have predicted that this decision will provide a legal basis for European airlines in similar situations in the future, protecting them from excessive compensation liability.


© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.

Special Coverage


Join us on social!

Top