EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62021CA0111

Case C-111/21: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 October 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — BT v Laudamotion GmbH (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Air transport — Montreal Convention — Article 17(1) — Liability of air carriers for death or bodily injuries sustained by passengers — Concept of ‘bodily injury’ — Post-traumatic stress disorder suffered by a passenger during the emergency evacuation of an aircraft)

OJ C 472, 12.12.2022, p. 11–11 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

12.12.2022   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 472/11


Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 20 October 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — BT v Laudamotion GmbH

(Case C-111/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Air transport - Montreal Convention - Article 17(1) - Liability of air carriers for death or bodily injuries sustained by passengers - Concept of ‘bodily injury’ - Post-traumatic stress disorder suffered by a passenger during the emergency evacuation of an aircraft)

(2022/C 472/12)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: BT

Defendant: Laudamotion GmbH

Operative part of the judgment

Article 17(1) of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, concluded at Montreal on 28 May 1999, signed by the European Community on 9 December 1999 and approved on its behalf by Council Decision 2001/539/EC of 5 April 2001,

must be interpreted as meaning that a psychological injury caused to a passenger by an ‘accident’, within the meaning of that provision, which is not linked to ‘bodily injury’, within the meaning of that provision, must be compensated in the same way as such a bodily injury, provided that the aggrieved passenger demonstrates the existence of an adverse effect on his or her psychological integrity of such gravity or intensity that it affects his or her general state of health and that it cannot be resolved without medical treatment.


(1)  OJ C 228, 14.6.2021.


Top