Document: 470 U.S. 392 105 S.Ct. 1338 84 L.Ed.2d 289 AIR FRANCE, Petitionerv.Valerie Hermien SAKS. No. 83-1785. Argued Jan. 15, 1985. Decided March 4, Syllabus Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention makes air carriers liable for injuries sustained by a passenger "if accident which caused damage so took place on board aircraft or in course any operations embarking disembarking." Respondent, while petitioner's jetliner as it descended to land Los Angeles trip from Paris, felt severe pressure and pain her left ear, continued after landed. Shortly thereafter, respondent consulted doctor who concluded that she had become permanently deaf ear. She then filed suit California state court, alleging hearing loss was negligent maintenance operation jetliner's pressurization system. After case removed Federal District Court, petitioner moved summary judgment ground could not prove injury an "accident" within meaning 17, evidence indicating system operated normal manner. Relying precedent defines term "unusual unexpected" happening, Court granted petitioner. The Appeals reversed, holding language, history, policy Montreal Agreement (a private agreement among airlines has been approved Government) impose absolute liability proximately risks inherent travel; cabin changes qualify definition contained Annex 13 International Civil Aviation "an occurrence associated with aircraft." Held: Liability under arises only if passenger's is unexpected unusual event happening external passenger, where results own internal reaction usual, normal, expected aircraft, 17. Pp. 396-408. (a) text suggests must be caused. difference language imposing passengers 18 destruction baggage "occurrence," implies drafters understood word mean something different than "occurrence." Moreover, refers injury, injury. thus that, however defined, cause satisfy rather alone. And, since drafted French continental jurists, further guidance furnished legal "accident"—when used describe injury—as being fortuitous, unexpected, unusual, unintended event. 397-400. (b) above interpretation consistent negotiating history Convention, conduct parties thereto, weight foreign American courts. 400-405. (c) While standard requiring courts distinguish causes are "accidents" "occurrences" requires drawing line may subject differences should fall, injured required some link chain passenger. Enforcement 17's requirement cannot circumvented reference Agreement. That waive "due care" defenses 20(1) did requirement. Nor can enforcement escaped equation "occurrence" 13, which, its corresponding expressly applies investigations principles Convention. 405-408. 724 F.2d 1383, reversed remanded. Stephen C. Johnson, San Francisco, Cal., Carroll E. Dubuc, Falls Church, Va., Republic France, amicus curiae supporting petitioner, special order Court. Bennett M. Cohen, respondent. Justice O'CONNOR delivered opinion 1 Convention1 We certiorari, 469 815, 80, 83 28 (1984), resolve conflict Courts proper this international carriage treaty. 2 * On November 16, 1980, Valerie Saks boarded Air France Paris 12-hour flight Angeles. went smoothly all respects until, Angeles, plane landed, but disembarked without informing crew member employee ailment. Five days later, 3 against App. 2. United States Central California. extensive discovery, "accident," according means "abnormal, aboard Id., at 9. All available evidence, including postflight reports, pilot's affidavit, testimony, indicated aircraft's usual Accordingly, airline contended dismissed because alleged respondent's system—could "accident." In opposition motion, acknowledged "[t]he sole question law presented . whether 'accident' ." 30. argued defined "hazard travel," indeed such hazard. 4 see DeMarines v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, 580 1193, 1196 (CA3 1978), France. See also Warshaw Trans World Inc., 442 F.Supp. 400, 412-413 (ED Pa.1977) (normal 17). A divided panel Ninth Circuit reversed. 1383 (1984). appellate court reviewed modification 1966 Agreement, Government. Relating Limitations Hague Protocol, CAB 18900, 31 Fed.Reg. 7302 (1966), note following 49 U.S.C.App. § 1502. travel. found Aviation, Dec. 7, 1944, 61 Stat. 1180, T.I.A.S. 1591, 15 U.N.T.S. 295; conformed CFR 830.2 (1984): takes between time person boards intention persons have F.2d, 1385. Normal definition. dissent agreed occurrence. 1388 (Wallace, J.). disagree adopted Appeals, we reverse. II 5 terms proves MacDonald Canada, 439 1402 (CA1 1971); Mathias Pan Am Airways, 53 F.R.D. 447 (WD Pa.1971). Shawcross & K. Beaumont, Law ¶ VII(147) (4th ed. 1984); D. Goedhuis, National Airlegislations 199 (1937). narrow issue meet burden showing answer turns clause treaty party. "[T]reaties construed more liberally agreements, ascertain their look beyond written words treaty, negotiations, practical construction parties." Choctaw Nation Indians States, 318 423, 431-432, 63 672, 677-678, 87 L.Ed. 877 (1943). analysis begin, however, context used. Maximov 373 49, 53-54, 1054, 1057-1058, 10 184 (1963). A. 6 establishes harm passengers. contains parallel provisions regarding baggage. governing accordingly set forth relevant part Articles margin.2 official translation portion text, before Senate when ratified 1934, reads follows: 7 "Article 8 "The carrier shall death wounding other bodily suffered disembarking. 9 "(1) of, to, checked goods, during transportation air." 3018-3019. 11 Two significant features these stand out both English texts. First, imposes whereas This they otherwise logically would same each article. supra, 200-201; Milde, Problems Liabilities Carriage 62 (Caroline Univ.1963). renders suspect 12 Second, light many senses used, distinction significant. As Lord Lindley observed 1903: technical clearly meaning. Speaking generally, liabilities, produces hurt loss. But often denote apart cause; known itself certainly called accident. effect, no attempt made discriminate them." Fenton J. Thorley Co., [1903] A.C. 443, 453. 14 apparently make "the effect"; specified define jurisprudence long recognized Landress Phoenix Mutual Life Ins. 291 491, 54 461, 78 934 (1934). gives two clues does term. illuminating. Note, Convention—Air Carrier Passenger Injuries Sustained Within Terminal, 45 Ford.L.Rev. 369, 388 (1976) ("The stark undefined"). To determine consider Reed Wiser, 555 1079 (CA2), cert. denied, 434 922, 98 399, 279 (1977); Block Compagnie Nationale 386 323 (CA5 1967), 905, 88 2053, 20 1363 (1968). true "we forever chained law" Rosman 34 N.Y.2d 385, 394, 358 N.Y.S.2d 97, 102, 314 N.E.2d 848, 853 (1974), our responsibility give specific shared expectations contracting parties. Reed, 1090; Day 528 (CA2 1975), 429 890, 97 246, 50 172 (1976). jurists. Lowenfeld Mendelsohn, 80 Harv.L.Rev. 497, 498-500 (1967). 16 survey cases dictionaries indicates differs little Great Britain, Germany, States. Thus, refer person's injury,3 sometimes latter sense, usually Grand Larousse de La Langue Francaise 29 (1971) (defining "Evenement fortuit et facheux, causant des dommages corporels ou materiels"); Haddad, Judgment June 19, 1979, Cour d'appel Premiere Chambre Civile, 1979 Revue Droit Aerien 327, 328, appeal rejected, February 1982, Cassation, 1982 Bull.Civ. I 63. parallels British jurisprudence. supra; Koehring Co. Automobile 353 993 (CA7 1965). consequently B interpreting proper, course, records drafting negotiation. U.S., 431, S.Ct., 677. "travaux preparatoires" published generally litigants, frequently materials ambiguities text. Inc. Franklin Mint Corp., 466 243, 259, 104 1776, 1786, 273 (1984); Maugnie Companie 549 1256 (CA9 1977); Fothergill Monarch Ltd., [1980] E.R. 696 (H.L.). became first conference 1925. protocol resulting Parish Conference article specifying: accidents, losses, breakdowns, delays. It taken reasonable measures designed pre-empt ."4 revised several times committee experts law,5 submitted second convened 1929. draft stated: 19 22 draft, like original permitted avoid proving damage. 265. None early drafts At Warsaw, delegates nations objected application identical rules baggage, German delegation proposed separate 36. need arose primarily thought commence upon delivery carrier, later embark aircraft. 72-74 (statements French, Swiss, Italian delegates). Reporter Preliminary Draft too difficult specifying distinction, unnecessary very mitigated moment measures, he risks, nor accidents occur[r]ing people fault third parties, cause." 77-78 (statement De Vos). were unpersuaded, majority voted rework 83. 21 few final "necessary measures" believed shield parties" "accidents Nevertheless, redrafted prerequisite Although discussion, President "given there entirely cases: wounding, disappearance delay, deemed better begin setting persons, goods finally delay." 205 Delegate Giannini) (emphasis added). comment least addition causation broader purpose specification commenced. intended negotiation support what evident text: accident, plane. Like offer precise Reference subsequent interpretations signatories helps clarify Guatemala City 1971, representatives amendment "event injury" "accident caused" exempt resulted "solely health passenger." Organization, Documents Law, City, ICAO Doc. 9040-LC/167-2, p. 189 (1972). Protocol 1971 Protocols Nos. 1975 include amendment, S.Exec.Rep. 98-1 (1983), yet Senate, therefore do govern disposition case. statements indicate viewed switch "event" expanding scope Swedish Delegate, example, referring choice "event," emphasized might "other acts considered accidents." Minutes 9040-LC/167-1, Mankiewicz, Convention: Am.J.Comp.L. 335, 337 (1972) (noting establish "strict liability"). 23 determining precisely "find opinions sister entitled considerable weight." Benjamins European 572 913, 919 1114, 99 1016, 59 79 (1979). decisions point, Aerien, embraces fortuitous unpredictable. scholars require sudden See, e.g., O. Riese Lacour, Precis 264 (1951) Swiss arguing independent will carrier); VII(148) 1984) Third Circuit's accords definitions "might well commend court"). These observations accord broadly, 1259, nevertheless refuse extend cover routine travel procedures produce due peculiar condition e.g. Abramson Japan Airlines 739 130 (sitting seat aggravated hernia "accident"), pending, 84-939; 1971) (fainting waiting terminal one's shown "accident"); Scherer App.Div.2d 636, 387 thrombophlebitis "accident"). III 24 conclude flexibly applied assessment circumstances surrounding injuries. Maugnie, 1262. For lower country interpreted broadly enough encompass torts committed terrorists fellow Evangelinos 550 152 1977) (en banc) (terrorist attack); 1975) (same), (1976); Krystal Overseas Airways 403 1322 (CD Cal.1975) (hijacking); Oliver Scandinavian System, CCH Av.Cas. 18,283 (Md.1983) (drunken falls injures passenger). contradictory trier fact decide here 1193 1978) (contradictory normal). Weintraub Capital 18,058 (N.Y.Sup.Ct., 1st Dept., 1981) (plaintiff's testimony "sudden dive" led change causing indisputably apply. 25 recognize line, realize "reasonable [people] differ widely fall." Schlesinger Wisconsin, 270 230, 241, 46 260, 262, 70 557 (1926) (Holmes, J., dissenting). draw today it, desire plunge into "Serbonian bog" accompanies attempts accidents. 499, 463 (Cardozo, Any product causes, able Until changed signatories, stretched remains "[o]ur duty enforce treaties whatever be, supreme land." 1093. 26 Our 1966. most expands right defend claims grounds necessary impossible take measures. Because waived commentators characterized "absolute" carriers. Harv.L.Rev., 599. demonstrates, characterization accurate. one speed settlement facilitate recovery, promoted provision waiver defenses. They operate liability, contributory negligence defense Warshaw, F.Supp., 408. Under modified sense claim distinct 20(1), located involves inquiry nature care avert inquiries occasion similar, decline employ similarity repeal face unaltered. 27 escape Aviation. apply investigations, B. Cheng, Transport 106-165 (1962). Finally, Appeals' reversal her. argues complaint action go forward Expressing view merits contention, unclear record raised Appeals. leave instance. Hoover Ronwin, 558, 574, n. 25, 1989, 1998, 590 remanded proceedings opinion. 30 ordered. POWELL consideration decision Unification Certain Rules Transportation Air, Oct. 12, 1929, 3000, T.S. 876 (1934), "Le transporteur est responsable du dommage survenu en cas mort, blessure toute autre lesion corporelle subie par un voyageur lorsque l'accident qui le s'est produit bord l'aeronef au cours toutes d'embarquement debarquement. Le destruction, perte avarie bagages enregistres marchandises l'evenement pendant transport aerien." 3005 36 recites drawn French. 3008. LeGrand, Dictionnaire Usuel (1931) malheureux ouvre la victime, soit suite l'impreoyance d'une personne, vertu 'risque professionel,' droit une reparation pecuniaire"). pertes, avaries retards. Il n'est pas s'il prouve avoir pris les mesures raisonnables pour eviter [1925 Paris] Internationale Prive (1936). Report Second Session, Technical Committee Legal Experts Questions (1927); (1928). carriage: "(a) death, traveler; "(b) loss, baggage; "(c) delay traveler, baggage." Affecting Questions, Minutes, Private Aeronautical October 4-12, 264-265 (R. Horner Legrez trans. 1975).

Category: 7