# C_2020201EN.01001301.xml

| 15.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 201/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 201/13

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bezirksgericht Schwechat (Austria) lodged on 25 February 2020 — JU v Air France Direktion für Österreich

(Case C-93/20)

(2020/C 201/19)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bezirksgericht Schwechat

Parties to the main proceedings

Claimant: JU

Defendant: Air France Direktion für Österreich

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 31(2) in conjunction with Article 31(4) of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (Montreal Convention) (1) to be interpreted as meaning that damage to checked baggage which occurred on board the aircraft or during a period within which the checked baggage was in the charge of the carrier must, in the case of a delayed delivery, be notified to the carrier, at the latest, within seven days from the date on which the baggage was placed at the disposal of the person entitled to delivery, and that, otherwise, no action is to lie against the carrier save in the case of fraud on its part? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 31(2) in conjunction with Article 31(4) of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (Montreal Convention) (1) to be interpreted as meaning that damage to checked baggage which occurred on board the aircraft or during a period within which the checked baggage was in the charge of the carrier must, in the case of a delayed delivery, be notified to the carrier, at the latest, within seven days from the date on which the baggage was placed at the disposal of the person entitled to delivery, and that, otherwise, no action is to lie against the carrier save in the case of fraud on its part?

| 2. | (If the answer to the first question is no:)
  Is Article 31(2) in conjunction with Article 31(4) of the Montreal Convention to be interpreted as meaning that damage to checked baggage which occurred on board the aircraft or during a period within which the checked baggage was in the charge of the carrier must, in the case of a delayed delivery, be notified to the carrier within 21 days from the date on which the baggage was placed at the disposal of the person entitled to delivery, and that, otherwise, no action is to lie against the carrier save in the case of fraud on its part? |
| --- | --- |

2.

(If the answer to the first question is no:)

Is Article 31(2) in conjunction with Article 31(4) of the Montreal Convention to be interpreted as meaning that damage to checked baggage which occurred on board the aircraft or during a period within which the checked baggage was in the charge of the carrier must, in the case of a delayed delivery, be notified to the carrier within 21 days from the date on which the baggage was placed at the disposal of the person entitled to delivery, and that, otherwise, no action is to lie against the carrier save in the case of fraud on its part?

---

(1)  2001/539/EC: Council Decision of 5 April 2001 on the conclusion by the European Community of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (the Montreal Convention) (OJ 2001 L 194, p. 38).

---