Australian & French courts rule on wheelchairs & low-cost airlines

The Federal Court of Australia has found that low-cost airline Jetstar Airways did not act unlawfully when it rejected a wheel-chair bound woman's booking. In King v Jetstar Airways Pty Ltd (No 2), plaintiff Sheila King booked a ticket on Jetstar's website, but was informed the following day that as there were two other passengers on the flight who required wheelchair assistance, she would not also be able to take that flight. Jetstar said this was the airline's policy in relation to wheelchair bound passengers.

Mrs King brought proceedings against Jetstar, arguing that the airline discriminated against her as it treated her "less favourably than a passenger who did not have a disability." However, it came to light during the course of proceedings that Mrs King omitted to select a wheelchair option when booking her flight online. When the airline offered her a different flight on the same route, she declined.

Justice Robertson held: "In my view Jetstar did not discriminate against Mrs. King, being a person with a disability because of the fact that she possessed a wheelchair... under [disability discrimination legislation] as in force at the time the provision of the assistance to wheelchair passengers to board and disembark from an A320 flight without a limit on the number of passengers requiring that assistance would impose unjustifiable hardship on Jetstar taking into account all relevant circumstances, including the matters in [the legislation]."

Mrs King is now obliged to pay the legal costs of the airline, however this figure has been capped at AU$20,000 as the case was deemed to be in the public interest.

By comparison in France, British budget carrier EasyJet has been fined €70,000 for refusing to allow three wheelchair-bound passengers to board planes for security reasons. The airline said that it was acting in accordance with British and European law in barring the disabled passengers from boarding unaccompanied. However the court found that there were no prevailing security reasons. The lawyer for the plaintiffs and for the French Paralysed Association said that the case was a "landmark ruling". The airline says that it may appeal the judgment.

Share

Resources

Sustaining Partners