Court of Appeal
Published March 4, 2009
Barclay v British Airways plc

A passenger slipping on a plastic strip embedded in the floor of an aircraft was not an accident since there was no distinct event which was not part of the usual, normal and expected operation of the aircraft and which had happened independently of anything done or omitted by the passenger.

The Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Laws, Lord Justice Thomas and Lord Justice Wilson) so held on December 18, 2008, when dismissing an appeal by Beverley Barclay from the dismissal by Mr Recorder West-Knights, QC, on February 27, 2008, at Oxford County Court of her claim for damages against British Airways plc.

LORD JUSTICE LAWS said that the issue was whether, where injury was caused by an event constituted by some contact or interaction between the passenger and the aeroplane in its normal state, such an event was an “accident” within the meaning of article 17.1 of the Montreal Convention 1999, which had force of law in England by virtue of Schedule 1B to the Carriage by Air Act 1961, as inserted by article 2(25) of the Carriage By Air Acts (Implementation of the Montreal Convention 1999) Order (SI 2002 No 263).

Article 17.1 contemplated a distinct event, not being any part of the usual, normal and expected operation of the aircraft, which happened independently of anything done or omitted by the passenger. That gave the term a reasonable scope which sat easily in the balance the Convention struck. There was no accident here that was external to the claimant, no event which happened independently of anything done or omitted by her.

Times Recommends

• The best legal yarns this Christmas
• Legal school 'earned £1m by exploiting bar course'
• Axe may fall on 5,000 more City lawyers