Library:
CTA Rules Against Air Carrier in Unruly Passenger Complaint
Published in the February 2010 issue of Transportation Notes - View Article
On January 20, 2010, the Canadian Transportation Agency (the “CTA”) released its decision in a complaint commenced by Kelly Murney against Sunwing Airlines, a Canadian charter carrier. The decision demonstrates the importance of providing detailed, attributable and specific evidence in submissions to the CTA in response to passenger complaints.
Mr. Murney and his wife, Marlene Jones, were scheduled to travel on a Sunwing flight from Calgary to Las Vegas in December 2008. The evidence filed in the complaint was that, after boarding the aircraft, a flight attendant refused to allow Ms. Murney to place a bag containing duty free liquor in the overhead bin because the bin contained emergency equipment and, as such, placing the bag in that location would create a security risk. The complainants alleged that the flight attendant refused to help them find another place to store the bag.
What followed is hotly contested as between the passengers and the air carrier.
Mr. Murney testified that he was respectful towards the flight crew and that, moreover, it was the flight attendant that behaved rudely and abruptly towards him. He alleged that he was harassed and taunted by her, although he did acknowledge swearing once during the altercation.
Sunwing’s position was that Mr. Murney became rude disrespectful and aggressive. It claimed that he threw his carry on luggage at the flight attendant (which was denied by Mr. Murney).
As a result of his alleged behaviour, Sunwing denied boarding to Mr. Murney, in accordance with the provisions of its tariff which allows it to refuse carriage where a passenger fails to observe the instructions of the flight crew, or becomes verbally or physically abusive or disorderly to the extent that the behaviour could possibly result in the physical comfort or safety of other passengers or the flight crew being disrupted.
The evidence filed on the alleged behaviour of Mr. Murney by Sunwing was two-pronged.
First, there were statements of the in-flight service director, the captain and a flight attendant, which generally described Ms. Jones as “having a bad attitude …, rude and un-cooperative.”
The Agency noted, however, that these statements “contain[ed] no evidence to explain the circumstances surrounding the alleged unruly behaviour.” The Agency held that “generalized statements are not sufficient to … warrant a refusal to transport.”
The second type of evidence offered by Sunwing was a collection of notes, made by a Sunwing employee, of discussions he had with passengers who witnessed the event. The names of the passengers were redacted from the notes.
The CTA refused to accept this evidence on the basis that “it is hearsay and not attributed to any identifiable individual and, therefore, did not reach an acceptable level of reliability.” The Agency commented that it could not “accept that an air carrier can use its passenger list to find supporting testimony for its position and then selectively provide this information, claiming confidentiality.”
The Agency found that Sunwing failed to demonstrate that there were reasonable grounds to refuse to transport Ms. Jones and that, in doing so, it did not properly apply its tariff.
Sunwing was ordered to pay $1,173.20 for alternative travel arrangements made by the complainant.
Complaint of Kelly Murney,
CTA Decision No. 22-C-A-2010