Blotteaux v. Qantas Airways Ltd.
171 F. App'x 566 (2006)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An injury sustained during a normal, uneventful international flight that results from a passenger's own internal reaction to the usual conditions of air travel, such as developing Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) from prolonged sitting, is not an 'accident' compensable under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention.
Facts:
- On or about September 26, 2001, Edward A. Blotteaux was a passenger in business class on a long-haul international flight operated by Qantas Airways Limited between Australia and the United States.
- During the flight, Blotteaux developed Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT), a blood clotting condition in his legs.
- The flight was uneventful, with no equipment malfunction or any other unusual occurrence.
- Qantas provided information regarding the risk of DVT on long flights through an in-flight video, an article in its in-flight magazine, and an audio entertainment segment.
- Blotteaux did not request any assistance or other accommodation from Qantas personnel during the flight.
- Despite noticing some leg discomfort as the trip progressed, Blotteaux did not seek any medical treatment until thirteen days after the flight concluded.
Procedural Posture:
- Edward A. Blotteaux filed a lawsuit against Qantas Airways Limited in a federal district court (the court of first instance).
- The district court granted Qantas's motion for summary judgment, dismissing Blotteaux's claim.
- Blotteaux, as the appellant, appealed the district court's decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, with Qantas as the appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a passenger developing Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) during a normal and uneventful international flight constitute an 'accident' for which the air carrier is liable under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention?
Opinions:
Majority - Unspecified (Memorandum Opinion)
No, a passenger developing DVT on a normal flight does not constitute an 'accident' under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention. For liability to attach, a passenger's injury must be caused by an unexpected or unusual event that is external to the passenger, not by the passenger's own internal reaction to the normal operations of an aircraft. The court relied on the Supreme Court's definition in Air France v. Saks, which established that an 'accident' must be an 'unexpected or unusual event or happening that is external to the passenger.' Blotteaux's DVT was his own internal reaction to the normal condition of prolonged sitting. The court distinguished this case from Olympic Airways v. Husain, where a flight attendant's refusal to assist a passenger constituted an 'accident,' because here Blotteaux never requested any assistance. The court also rejected Blotteaux's failure-to-warn claim, finding no factual basis for it as Qantas had provided warnings via video, print, and audio.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the narrow definition of 'accident' under the Warsaw Convention as established in Air France v. Saks. It clarifies that injuries arising from the inherent and normal conditions of air travel, even known medical risks like DVT, are not compensable unless caused by a distinct, unusual external event or a specific action or inaction by the crew. The ruling solidifies the principle that an airline is not a strict insurer of a passenger's health during a flight. This makes it more difficult for plaintiffs to recover damages for medical conditions that develop during otherwise unremarkable flights, requiring them to pinpoint a specific external cause rather than simply the environment of air travel itself.
