engleski

Is the Court of Justice of the EU Rewriting the Montreal Convention?

Knowing that defining an “accident” under Article 17 of the Montreal Convention had been an issue even before the Convention was signed, the only way to give this concept a meaning was through case law. Although the case law on this issue is abundant, the question of whether there was an accident in a specific case has to be determined by taking all circumstances into account, and by so doing, courts can, and do, draw different conclusions. This paper examines some of the most important cases regarding the interpretation of Regulation 261/2004 that make obvious examples of how the CJEU is rewriting the existing regulation. This is followed by an analysis of the Court’s recent case law on the interpretation of Article 17 of the Montreal Convention, where the Court’s approach toward defining an accident is analyzed and compared with the earlier established case law of other chosen national courts, especially those in the United States.

Montreal Convention ; Court of Justice of the EU

nije evidentirano