A federal trial court in Massachusetts held that the Montreal Convention governs a passenger's claim against an airline that detained him on the aircraft and then escorted him through the terminal because the entire incident occurred while the passenger was "disembarking" within the meaning of the Convention.

In Dagi v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., the plaintiff flew from Boston to London. During the flight, one of the flight attendants accused the plaintiff of tampering with her bag. When the flight landed in London, the flight attendant prevented the plaintiff from deplaning before the other passengers and, once plaintiff was on the jetway, directed a Delta ground employee to detain the plaintiff and turn him over to the authorities. The ground employee escorted the plaintiff on a ten to fifteen minute walk through a public terminal that Delta did not control to another location in the airport. The ground employee then escorted the plaintiff back to a location near the gate and turned him over to a Delta supervisor. A British police officer then interviewed plaintiff by telephone, and told him he was free to go.

More than two years after the incident, the plaintiff sued the airline alleging common law tort claims arising from his confinement and Delta moved to dismiss on the ground that the Montreal Convention, with its two-year period of limitations, exclusively governed the plaintiff's claims. The Montreal Convention, which applies to "international carriage by air," includes within its scope events that occur "in the course of any of the operations of . . . disembarking." The question before the court in Dagi, then, was whether the incident alleged by the plaintiff occurred during "disembarkation."

The court explained that both the location and timing of the incident supported a conclusion that it occurred while the plaintiff was disembarking. The incident: (1) "began on and continued seamlessly at Delta's direction directly from the aircraft and then back to its vicinity during the process of disembarkation" and (2) "unfolded in an unbroken chain until the police officer terminated the airline's direction and control" such that "[t]here was no intervening period between [the plaintiff] leaving the aircraft itself and the alleged tortious conduct." The court also focused on the control Delta exerted over the plaintiff: "[W]here an airline continues to wield effective control over an individual even at some distance from the curtilage of the airplane, disembarkation may still be occurring." As a result, the case was dismissed pursuant to the Montreal Convention period of limitations.

The Dagi case is a good example of why proximity to the aircraft alone is insufficient to determine whether an incident occurred during embarkation or disembarkation such that the Montreal Convention applies. Dagi v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., No. 18-11432, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 208678 (D. Mass. Dec. 11, 2018).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.