Let me sort this argument into issues, one by one
Issue 1: Was the late arrival of the flight at Philadelphia within the control of the airline?
I think we all now say it was not. It was an ATC problem
Issue 2: Was the departure of the flight out to Jacksonville that left the OP behind within the airline's control?
I am saying it was their decision and from your posts you appear to be agreeing it was their decision, but justifying it because of the 122 odd passengers that would have been delayed, had they waited. So we are all saying that that departure was within the airline's control.
Issue 3: Was the airline justified to depart for Jacksonville even knowing that there were connecting passengers who were late?
We all say it was not practical to delay 122 passengers for the two, so we agree that the airline made the correct decision depart and leave the OP behind
Issue 4: Was the airline in breach of contract by so departing?
Here is where we part company. You say they are not because they offered her another flight the next morning and I say they were in breach because the OPs flight to Jacksonville was for the same evening. Here is where a party to a contract makes a decision to suit the many but find himself in breach of contract with a few.
To answere whether they are in breach, we need to step back a bit to answer this: Was the contract merely for departure or destination points or for dates and times as well. I say it is for dates and times as well. The passenger's corresponding obligation to present himself at the check in counter for a particular date and time must be met with a reciprocal obligation on the part of the airline. Next, to ask if the date and time were part of the contract, what would the officious bystander say if he heard this conversation between a passenger and an airline agent when the agent sold the ticket:
Airline agent: Mr Phx, I trust you know that although your ticket says you are flying from New York JFK to Miami at 9 a.m. on 10th October 2009, remember the date or time is not part of the contract and we can take you there whenever we want while you sleep at JFK
PHX: Sure, Mr Agent. I love sleeping in JFK airport. We all know that when we turn up at the airport for a flight, any kind of delay is acceptable.
The test in law as to whether this is the contract, is what the officious bystander will say when he heard that conversation. He will be positively horrified. And that is because it is within the experience of passengers that when they turn up for a flight, they will travel on time or perhaps with reasonble delays of an hour or two, or even three or four, but any delay more than that would be absolutely unacceptable.
People returning home after a trip often take up work the next day, and it cannot be that the contract is for travel anytime.
The IATA conditions of carriage have been declared void many times by the Court for any number of reasons - writing too small, not drawn to passengers attention, in conflict with the Warsaw Convention, only coming to passengers attention after completion of the contract.
What would the officious bystander say if he heard this converstion:
Agent: Mr Mars, we are selling you a ticket from JFK to MIA on 10th October 2009 at 9 a.m. as you requested
Mars: Not so fast. Let me read that writing on the ticket.
[Mars pulls out his magnifying glass and reads the writing while passengers behind him start complaining]
Agent to passengers behind: Please, our practice at this airline is that everyone must read the conditions of contract written on the ticket otherwise we can't sell you the ticket.
The officious bystander would be most surprised.
It is beyond any question in my mind that the date and time on a ticket are part of the contract, and I would invite any lawyer working for any airline to come on this site and contradict me on this.
Issue 5: Did the OP act reasonably to pay $511 for new tickets when she may have spent the night in a hotel?
This may be her weakest point but I still think she could succeed in this claim.
She would have had to pay at least $120 or so for a hotel room, and that is for the two star Red Roofs and Comfort Inns, and unless it had free airport shuttle, pay, say $20 or so each way from airport to hotel. Then once at the hotel she would have to take a taxi to and from an all night superstore or drugstore to look for her baby formula. Then she would have to find dinner for herself and her husband that night in Philadelphia and breakfast next morning. That is at least $250. When one considers the strain the baby would be put through in this exercise, she decided to spend get her relative to pay the $511 for the new tickets. I can't see that she acted unreasonably. She is not asking for any special favour because of the baby. Once she establishes that the airline was in breach of the contract, she has to act reasonably and this includes ensuring her baby's welfare which is to get home asap.
|