Overall, American victims of international aviation accidents and their families would be better compensated under Protocol No.3 and the proposed supplemental compensation plan than they would be if the current international agreements remained in effect or if no international agreements existed. The Protocol and the plan would increase the timeliness of compensation for claimants by eliminating their need to prove that airline was at fault before they could receive compensation and by providing incentives for the airlines to settle claims promptly. Claimant's costs of securing compensation would be reduced because, for the reasons cited above, most cases would be settled without a trial and attendant costs. Should cases go to trial because the amount of damages is in dispute, courts would be permitted to impose claimants' legal costs on airlines. The Protocol and the plan would also increase the level of compensation for claimants by significantly raising the airlines' liability limit, providing funds for additional compensation of victims, and decreasing the proportion of the damage award that claimants pay for legal costs. Furthermore, the Protocol and the plan would increase the likelihood the Americans could have their lawsuits for damages tried in U.S. court if compensation offers are unsatisfactory. As a result, U.S. standards of compensation would be in determining damage awards.Finally, implementation of Protocol No.3 is not likely to jeopardize air-line safety. Adverse economic impacts due to aviation accidents and government safety regulations--not fear of litigation--are the primary incentives for airlines to operate safely.


    Access

    Access via TIB

    Check availability in my library


    Export, share and cite



    Title :

    International Aviation: Implications of Ratifying Montreal Aviation Protocol Number 3


    Publication date :

    1990


    Size :

    19 pages


    Type of media :

    Report


    Type of material :

    No indication


    Language :

    English