Passengers sought compensation for delayed flight
Lufthansa cited Montreal Convention exemption
Court found airline took all reasonable measures
Alternative flights, meal vouchers factored into ruling
A group of airline passengers who sued over a nearly 20-hour flight delay caused by bad weather lost their case in court. The judge ruled that the carrier had taken all reasonably required measures — including providing alternative flights and meal vouchers — and was therefore not liable.
According to legal sources, Judge Kim Yu-seong of the Seoul Central District Court ruled against 46 passengers in July in their damages suit against German carrier Lufthansa, in which they had sought 950,000 won ($699) per person in compensation.
The passengers had booked flights in June 2024 traveling from Incheon to London via Munich. The flight, originally scheduled to arrive at 8:45 p.m. on June 27, 2024, did not land until 4:30 p.m. the following day — a delay of 19 hours and 45 minutes caused by deteriorating weather.
The passengers filed a damages suit against the airline in June last year, arguing it should pay compensation for the delayed transport. The airline rebuffed the claim, saying its liability was exempt and that it had taken all reasonably required measures.
The court sided with the airline.
The court noted that both the departure and arrival countries are parties to the Montreal Convention and that the convention therefore applied to the contract. The Montreal Convention is an international treaty that standardizes airline liability rules and compensation obligations.
Under the convention, airlines are liable for damages caused by flight delays — but are exempt from liability if they can show they took all measures that could reasonably be required to avoid the harm.
The court found that the delay stemmed from bad weather and other force majeure circumstances, and that the airline had taken all reasonably required measures, entitling it to the exemption.
The court explained that decisions about flight operations during severe weather are in effect impossible for airlines to make unilaterally or to prevent, as airport authorities determine them.
It also noted that the extreme weather at the time — including thunderstorms and hail — appeared to have caused significant delays to other international flights departing from or transiting through Munich Airport.
The court further found that the airline had promptly notified passengers of the delay via mobile message as soon as it was confirmed.
It added that the airline had provided alternative flights, waived the associated fees and issued meal vouchers to all passengers — and concluded that, taken together, these actions exempted the carrier from liability.
The ruling has not yet been finalized. The passengers have filed an appeal, and the case is pending before the Seoul Central District Court in its second instance.
notstrong@heraldcorp.com
