Compensation for delayed flights can't be claimed by person who paid for the tickets, B.C. tribunal rules

The small claims tribunal in British Columbia has ruled that Air Canada must provide financial restitution to two travelers whose journey to Egypt was postponed for over 56 hours. However, compensation for the three additional family members accompanying them has been temporarily denied.

The explanation for why only two individuals out of the five-member group were able to receive reimbursement, as stated in the recent online ruling by the Civil Resolution Tribunal, is that individuals can only seek compensation under Canada's Air Passenger Protection Regulations for delays they personally encounter, and not for delays experienced by their companions.

In the decision, tribunal vice chair Shelley Lopez stated that the two specified individuals are requesting a combined sum of $5,000 in compensation for the APPR. Notably, this compensation is not only for themselves but also includes their three additional family members who are accompanying them on the trip.

Since I discover that the APPR's payment structure is determined by a passenger's eligibility, it is my belief that the petitioners do not have the authority to seek compensation for their additional three relatives.

Lopez granted a sum of $1,000 to both individuals listed as Abdallah Mohamed and Ghada Ali. In addition to this amount, they were also awarded pre-judgment interest and CRT fees.

Furthermore, she made it clear that "this ruling does not prohibit the three remaining relatives from pursuing a complaint against Air Canada concerning their flight delay, as long as it is within the time frame mandated by the law."

Airline Held Responsibility For Delay

Air Canada, on its end, informed the tribunal that it should not be obligated to compensate the family as the delay which led to them missing their connecting flight was beyond their authority.

Mohamed, Ali, and their three unidentified relatives had plans to journey from Kelowna to Cairo on July 4th, 2022.

Based on the CRT ruling, the initial part of the trip - from Kelowna to Vancouver - experienced a delay of two hours and nine minutes. Consequently, the flight arrived at the gate approximately 15 minutes after the subsequent flight (which was headed to London) had already departed.

As a result of this, the family was rescheduled for another flight heading to London. The flight was set to depart on July 6, causing the family to reach Egypt over two days past their original anticipated arrival date.

According to the Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR), major airlines such as Air Canada are obligated to compensate customers with $1,000 if delays caused solely by the airline cause them to reach their intended destination nine or more hours later than scheduled.

In circumstances beyond the airline's authority, the APPR does not mandate reimbursement to travelers for the discomfort caused. However, alternative arrangements such as rescheduling or giving back the payment must be provided.

For Mohamed and Ali, Air Canada explained that the Kelowna flight was postponed because of "restrictions imposed by air traffic control," which is a matter concerning the airport's operations that is beyond their control. As evidence, they provided papers regarding the flight, which mentioned a "program to hold planes on the ground" that was implemented at Vancouver International Airport on that particular day due to manpower problems. The documents also mentioned limitations imposed by the sales agent at the airport.

Lopez raised doubts about the latter portion of the explanation, pointing out that Air Canada is in the optimal position to present evidence regarding the cause of an aircraft delay. Thus, it is the responsibility of the airline to present evidence proving that the delay was beyond their control.

Based on the information at hand, I am inclined to believe that the mention of 'sales agent' is more likely referencing Air Canada workers rather than personnel stationed at the airport, as expressed in her statement.

I express this viewpoint because no explanation has been provided to indicate the presence of airport sales agents and how their actions might have affected the timing of a flight. Therefore, considering the available evidence, I am unable to conclude with certainty that all of the Kelowna flight's delay was caused by factors beyond Air Canada's influence.

Advocate Lauds Helpful Decision

Gabor Lukács, an advocate for passenger rights and the creator and leader of the non-profit organization Air Passenger Rights, informed CTV News that the recent decision by the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) is not the initial ruling addressing the question of who is eligible for compensation according to the Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR).

However, he mentioned that it is "beneficial" as it clearly states that the airline's responsibility lies with the passenger facing inconvenience, rather than the individual who bought the ticket for them.

"(Lopez) understood the law flawlessly," he stated. "If I had been in her position, I would have arrived at the identical conclusion."

According to Lukács, it is important for travelers who want to seek compensation through small claims lawsuits under the APPR to make sure that all individuals from their group who were affected by the delay either become plaintiffs themselves or submit their own complaints.

He also commended Lopez for the additional insights her decision offers to the travelers.

Essentially, Lukács mentioned that she is conveying a message to them, saying, "Listen folks, simply submit the identical thing for the remaining three individuals and you'll receive it." She is making an extra effort to assist the parties. While she is upholding the law, she is also offering them significant insights into their other entitlements.

Informally known as a "passenger rights charter" for individuals traveling by air in Canada, the Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR) were implemented in 2019. However, there is a possibility of notable changes being made to it soon due to an overwhelming number of over 52,000 unresolved complaints awaiting review by the Canadian Transportation Agency.

The CTA has been gathering opinions on the suggested modifications to the rules over the past month.

Lukács and his group teamed up with the Public Interest Advocacy Centre and University of Ottawa law professor Marina Pavlovic to submit their thoughts to the CTA's consultation on Wednesday.

They state that the aim of their submission is to make the rules easier and more efficient, to align Canada's regulations with those of the European Union and other regions, and to reduce conflicts and animosity between passengers and airlines.