Will the Dawson ruling ultimately be seen as a victory or a loss for the consumer, asks Rob Williams
Following within the space of little over a week on the heels of Jet2.com Ltd v Huzar [2014] EWCA Civ 791, [2014] All ER (D) 86 (Jun), Dawson v Thomson Airways [2014] EWCA Civ 845, [2014] All ER (D) 154 (Jun) is the second Court of Appeal flight delay compensation case to go against the airlines. The issue in Dawson was whether the limitation period was two years under the Montreal Convention or six years under the Limitation Act for bringing a flight delay claim.
Mr Dawson’s flight from Gatwick to the Dominican Republic was delayed and arrived at its destination over six hours late as a result of staff shortages. Dawson brought a claim pursuant to EU Regulation No. 261/2004 for compensation for the delay he experienced. Thomson Airways accepted they would have to compensate Dawson had he brought his claim in time, but argued that the limitation period was two years as it was governed by the Montreal Convention. Dawson contended
