The Notion of Accident and the Criteria for its Determination in light of Judicial Judgements in International Air Transport

The Warsaw Convention of 1929 and the Montreal Convention of 1999 were adopted for the purpose of unifying certain rules for international carriage by air, including the air carrier’s liability for any damage or injury that occurs to a passenger. Nevertheless, the absence of the accident’s definition led to the disappearance of the desired unification. In addition, both parties to the carriage contract are affected by the accident; as the passenger does not enjoy the protection guaranteed thereto unless an accident occurs, while the liability of the air carrier is presumed once an accident occurs, and the remaining conditions of liability are fulfilled.



Therefore, this research attempts to trace the opinions of jurists, the objectives of the Warsaw Convention, the development of the rules of liability, the preparatory works for the Warsaw Convention and its amending protocols, the Montreal Convention, and the discussions that took place between the delegates of countries; to find a clear explanation for the notion of accident. This research also sheds light on the different judicial applications to explain the criteria used by the courts when determining whether or not an accident exists, using the descriptive, analytical and critical approaches.



The research reaches several results, including that the accident requires the presence of an unexpected or unusual event which is external to the passenger and related to air transportation or its risks, noting that the courts have expanded the interpretation of these standards and disagreed regarding the last standard. In addition, the research concludes that the Montreal Convention does not intend to change the meaning of the accident when it establishes a system of strict liability. The research proposes a definition of an air accident based on the interpretation of the criteria that the courts employed in defining it.