Image: c. https://www.facebook.com/buscandoamona
If your pet goes missing during air travel, you cannot claim more compensation than for lost luggage, the European Court of Justice ruled. Judges at the court in Luxembourg said a dog transported by air belongs in the same category as suitcases and bags.
The ECJ, Europe’s highest court, was asked to intervene after a dog called Mona was lost during a journey from Buenos Aires to Barcelona, on an Iberia flight in October 2019. Mona was to travel in the cargo hold but escaped on the way to the plane, and despite an intense campaign on social media launched by the owner, Felicísima, she was never recovered.
Felicísima sought €5,000 (£4,340) for “non-material damage” from the airline before a Spanish court in a court case that lasted six years. Iberia accepted liability but cited the Montreal Convention, which governs international air transport of passengers, luggage and cargo, and sets liability limits for checked baggage.
The Spanish court asked the EU court to intervene, and the EU judges ruled that the term “passengers” refers to human travellers, meaning pets cannot be considered passengers. Compensation for the loss of a pet is therefore limited to the rules applicable to checked baggage.
Felicísima said she would never give up her search, saying it was “a disgrace” if someone in Buenos Aires had taken her dog and claimed it as their own. “Who has Mona, knowing that she is ours; knowing the pain we have felt?” she bemoaned in a Facebook post.
The case sets a precedent for anyone travelling with pets who do not make a special declaration about the contents of the pet crate, and the animal is lost.
The girl’s lawyer in Madrid, Carlos Villa Corta, said
“I believe that a great opportunity has been missed to continue raising awareness of the rights of animals and the people who care for them. Ultimately, the ECJ considers that pets do not deserve special or enhanced legal protection compared to a simple suitcase.”
The judgment also noted that the liability of an airline for lost baggage could be determined by any special declaration on contents, which did not happen in this case.
The ECJ said:
“The Montréal convention clearly refers to persons and baggage. It therefore follows from the clear wording of this provision that the term ‘persons’ covers ‘passengers’, such that a pet cannot be considered a ‘passenger’. It must therefore be considered that, for the purposes of air transport, a pet falls within the concept of ‘baggage’ and compensation for damage resulting from its loss during such transport is subject to the liability regime laid down for baggage.”
According to Spanish reports on the original case, the court ruled that because a special declaration about the animal was not made before the flight, Felicísima was entitled to only €1,578.82.
In a statement, the ECJ said:
“The fact that the protection of animal welfare is an objective of general interest recognised by the European Union does not prevent animals from being transported as ‘baggage’ and from being regarded as such for the purposes of the liability resulting from the loss of an animal.”
The Montreal Convention sets the amount of compensation in a currency called Special Drawing Rights, and for lost luggage, it is 1,519 Special Drawing Rights. This is currently equivalent to around €1,800.