DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 143/Tuesday, July 27, 1999/Rules and Regulations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 143/Tuesday, July 27, 1999/Rules and Regulations 40654 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 27, 1999 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Act of 1958, as amended, requires every exemption from the tariff-filing U.S. and foreign air carrier to file with requirement set forth in part 221. Under Office of the Secretary the Department, and to keep open for the rule in new part 293, the Assistant public inspection, tariffs showing all Secretary will issue a notice specifying 14 CFR Parts 221, 250, and 293 prices for ``foreign air transportation'' the terms of the exemptions for markets [Docket No. OST±97±2050] between points served by that carrier, as in Category A (no fare filing), Category well as all the rules relating to that B (normal economy fare filing only) or RIN 2105±AC61 transportation to the extent required by Category C (filing all fares), taking into Exemptions From Passenger Tariff- the Department. This requirement account specific factors present in each Filing Requirements in Certain includes passenger fares, related charges market. After this first determination, Instances and governing rules. 14 CFR part 221 the Assistant Secretary, acting on his establishes the detailed tariff-filing rules own initiative or in response to AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT. and authority for approvals, rejections petitions, may issue further notices ACTION: Final rule. and waivers. Once allowed to become transferring countries between effective by the Department, these tariffs categories. For example, the entry into SUMMARY: Pursuant to the notice become legally binding terms in the force of an ``open skies'' air transport procedures in new part 293, the contract of carriage for international air agreement would warrent moving a Department is exempting U.S. and transportation. country into Category A where no fares foreign air carriers from the statutory In his Regulatory Reinvention will be filed. On the other hand, foreign and regulatory duty to file international Initiative Memorandum of March 4, government actions denying U.S. carrier passenger tariffs with DOT in certain 1995, President Clinton directed Federal pricing initiatives, could justify the re- instances, subject to the reimposition of agencies to conduct a page-by-page institution of full tariff filing the duty in specific cases when review of all of their regulations and to reguirements in Category C.1 consistent with the public interest. In ``eliminate or revise those that are In addition, the Department has addition, the Department is reissuing a outdated or otherwise in need of identified a substantial number of new version of part 221 that eliminates reform.'' In response to that directive, provisions in part 221 that are most of the traditional paper format and the Department has undertaken a review redundant, contain obsolete references, filing procedures set forth in the present of its aviation economic regulations or are out-dated given present regulatory version of 14 CFR part 221. contained in 14 CFR Chapter II to practices and needs. Accordingly, the Following the notice specified in new determine whether changes should be Department is issuing a general revision part 293, certain currently effective made to promote economic growth, of part 221 to eliminate redundancies, price tariffs are canceled as a matter of create jobs, or eliminate unnecessary excess verbiage and obsolete provisions; law, pending tariff applications covered costs or other burdens on the economy. to make necessary technical changes; by the exemption are dismissed, and Among the regulations reviewed are and to reorganize the subparts in a more new tariffs will generally not be those governing the filing of tariffs by logical order. airlines for their foreign air accepted for filing. In response to Comments comments, currently effective rules transportation, set forth in 14 CFR part related to general ``conditions of 221. We received comments on our carriage'' of each passenger, set forth in In two recently completed rulemaking proposal from Air Pacific Limited (Air general governing rules tariffs, may proceedings, the Department Pacific); the Airline Tariff Publishing continue in legal effect for 180 days determined that the amount of tariff Company (ATPCO); the Air Transport from the date of effectiveness of the material filed by carriers exceeded our Association of America (ATA); British final rule, although carriers may elect to regulatory requirements in certain Airways PLC (BA); Federal Express cancel them earlier and may also respects; that alternative methods Corporation (FedEx); the International deviate from such rules through express existed for protecting consumers and Air Transport Association (IATA); agreement. This action is taken on the other elements of the public interest Korean Air Lines Co., Ltd. (KAL); Department's initiative in order to which are more effective than filed Pakistan International Airlines streamline government operations and tariffs; and that procedures should be Corporation (PIA); Qantas Airways eliminate unjustified regulatory developed to foster the electronic filing Limited (Qantas); and United Air Lines, burdens. and the review of those tariffs which Inc. (UAL). Finally, on September 30, should continue to be filed. On 1997, ATA filed a motion for leave to DATES: This regulation is effective on November 30, 1995, the Department file supplemental comments.2 September 10, 1999. However, the published a final rule exempting The carriers did not comment upon cancellation of certain general tariff carriers from their regulatory duty to file the proposed revisions to part 221 itself, rules will take place 180 days later as tariffs for the foreign air transportation except where expressing general provided in § 293.10 of new part 293. of cargo. On April 24, 1996, the approval. However, ATA expressed FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Department published a final rule concern with our tentative decision to John H. Kiser or Mr. Keith A. Shangraw, establishing procedures for the leave intact the existing Warsaw Office of the Secretary, Office of electronic filing of passenger rules Convention notice requirements in part International Aviation, X±43, tariffs. 221 until future needs in this area Department of Transportation, 400 In this, the third rulemaking become clearer. While initially Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC proceeding involving the tariff system, requesting only that the Department be 20590. Telephone: (202) 366±2435. undertaken as part of the President's SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: directive, the Department has 1 However, adverse foreign government actions in determined that the filing of certain areas not directly involving pricing, such as route Background tariffs with the Department for the and capacity issues, would not warrant re- institution of full Category C tariff filing Section 41504 of Title 49 of the foreign air transportation of passengers requirements, except in the most unusual United States Code (the Code), formerly is no longer necessary or appropriate, circumstances. section 403(a) of the Federal Aviation and accordingly grants another 2 We grant ATA's motion. VerDate 18-JUN-99 13:27 Jul 26, 1999 Jkt 183247 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\27JYR2.XXX pfrm03 PsN: 27JYR2 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 143 / Tuesday, July 27, 1999 / Rules and Regulations 40655 prepared to make future changes to its electronic filing system (EFS). ATA phase-out schedule for passenger rules these requirements to reflect the new requests that the Department not grant tariffs. ATA, BA and ATA feel that a 90- passenger liability limits agreed to by carriers of countries in Categories A or day transitional period would be too many carriers, ATA, in its supplemental B an exemption from filing fares for short, and that more time is needed to comments, urges the Department to travel between the United States and a revise passenger travel documents and adopt herein ``a more flexible notice third country (i.e., on fifth and sixth notice procedures. ATA argues that requirement'' that would permit carriers freedom services) unless that carrier's carriers need more time to assure a which have filed tariff revisions waiving home country has agreed bilaterally to smooth transition to the new regime the Warsaw passenger liability limits a pricing regime which affords U.S. given the longstanding requirement to pursuant to DOT-approved agreements carriers the right to exercise price file passenger tariffs and the overall to devise, subject to DOT approval, a leadership in fifth and sixth freedom complexity of the foreign air single ticket notice to replace both the markets, as well as in third and fourth transportation environment. BA asserts detailed notice prescribed in current freedom markets. Finally, UAL takes that continuation of that existing regime § 221.175 for services involving the issue with the categories in which the for another 180 days would cause no United States and the separate, NPRM proposed to place certain harm, and would benefit both worldwide Warsaw liability notice countries and urges that the NPRM's passengers and carriers by reducing the appearing on standard ticket stock. country-category list and any future possibility that the old tariff system for Comments regarding the proposed actions regarding categorization of filing passenger rules will expire before exemption from passenger tariff filing countries be subject to the procedures the new section 221.177 notice system requirements were generally positive. for public
Load more

Recommended publications
  • IT Travel Group Has Operated As a HOST TRAVEL AGENCY Since June of 1989
    Dear Travel Entrepreneur: IT Travel Group has operated as a HOST TRAVEL AGENCY since June of 1989. The management of IT Travel Group would like to share with you the following information about our unique support system offered Independent Contractors (IC) via our HOST AGENCY operating divisions: A Host Agency’s responsibilities include holding travel industry conference appointments with Domestic (ARC) and International (IATAN) airlines for ticket issuance capabilities, and Cruise line appointments (CLIA) for earning commissions from cruise sales. International Tours of Houston (ITH) is bonded and holds conference appointments with the following travel industry organizations: ARC – Airline Reporting Corporation – This conference appoints travel agent business entities on behalf of the Domestic Air Lines and controls the issuance of ticket stock and payment for tickets issued by travel agencies. Minimum appointment criteria: $20,000 Surety Bond or LOC and agent qualifier with 18 to 24 months agency work experience and Certified ARC Specialist (CAS) certificate. IATAN – International Airline Travel Agency Network - This conference also appoints travel agent entities for the International Air Carriers and administers the travel agent eligibility list for reduced rate travel benefits. CLIA – Cruise Lines International Association – This conference represents the majority of the world’s cruise lines and administers the appointment process for travel entities to earn commission from their cruise sales. ITH and staff hold individual and Host
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Airline Distribution, 2016 - 2021
    The Future of Airline Distribution, 2016 - 2021 By Henry H. Harteveldt, Atmosphere Research Group CONTENTS 3 INTRODUCTION 5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 HOW SHOULD AIRLINES PREPARE TO SERVE THE AIRLINE TRAVELER OF 2021? 26 TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION AND THE EVOLVING TECHNOLOGY LANDSCAPE 29 AIRLINE DISTRIBUTION IN 2021 70 CONCLUSION 72 ENDNOTES © 2016 International Air Transport Association. All rights reserved. 2 INTRODUCTION Introduction from Atmosphere Research Atmosphere Research Group is honored to have Airlines that want to become true retailers are once again been selected by IATA to prepare this well-positioned to do so. Carriers have an abun- report on the future of airline distribution. We dance of technologies, including cloud comput- believe that the five-year timeframe this report ing, artificial intelligence, and mobility, that they covers – 2016 to 2021 – will see the successful can use to help them bring their products to mar- introduction of true retailing among the world’s ket in more meaningful ways. IATA’s NDC, One airlines and their distribution partners. Order, and NGISS initiatives are being brought to market to help airlines be more successful busi- This report reflects Atmosphere Research’s in- nesses. As each airline independently contem- dependent and objective analysis based on our plates its distribution strategies and tactics, we extensive industry and consumer research (for hope this report will serve as a helpful resource. more information about how the research was conducted, please refer to the “Research Method- ology” section). © 2016 International Air Transport Association. All rights reserved. 3 Future of Distribution Report 2016-2021 Introduction from IATA In 2012 IATA commissioned Atmosphere Research Game changes are prompted by consumer needs, to conduct a survey on the Future of Airline Dis- or by the ability to offer new solutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Compensation Under the Warsaw Convention for Victims of Hijackings and Terrorist Attacks Carol Lynne Tomeny
    Brooklyn Journal of International Law Volume 3 | Issue 1 Article 2 1976 Compensation Under the Warsaw Convention for Victims of Hijackings and Terrorist Attacks Carol Lynne Tomeny Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil Recommended Citation Carol L. Tomeny, Compensation Under the Warsaw Convention for Victims of Hijackings and Terrorist Attacks, 3 Brook. J. Int'l L. (1976). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil/vol3/iss1/2 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Brooklyn Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. NOTES COMPENSATION UNDER THE WARSAW CONVENTION FOR VICTIMS OF HIJACKINGS AND TERRORIST ATTACKS INTRODUCTION The Warsaw Convention' has generated enormous interest and controversy since its inception. Most criticism has focused upon the inequity of the Convention's ceiling on recoveries for passenger injury and death in international aviation while no limitation of liability usually exists for domestic aviation. 2 In- deed, a large portion of Convention litigation has involved at- tempts to avoid the Convention's liability limits, either by em- ploying one of the methods provided by the Convention or by demonstrating the inapplicability of the Convention. Hijacking and terrorist activities have provided the bases of most recent Convention litigation and have led to attempts by injured plaintiffs to be absorbed into the Convention rather than to remain outside it and subject totally to local law. This note examines the Warsaw Convention itself and its modifying agree- ments in order to analyze the reasons for this change and the effect of the attempted expansion of the Convention to accom- modate these activities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Air Consolidator Guide
    SUPPLEMENT TO: ® MARCH 2009 JAXFAX MAGAZINE The Travel Agents’ Path to Profits The Air Consolidator Guide What Is An Airline Ticket Consolidator? The Insider’s Guide to Air Consolidators Changing Times International Air Consolidator Value Demystifying Consolidators MARCH 2009 • VOLUME 37, NO. 7 SUPPLEMENT to: ® •• 22000099 •• JAXFAX MAGAZINE IS PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY: Jet Airtransport Exchange, Inc. (JAX) CCOONNSSOOLLIIDDAATTOORR 52 W Main St., Milford, CT 06460, 203-301-0255, F: 203-301- 0250 Audited Circulation GGUUIIDDEE && DDIIRREECCTTOORRYY Douglas Cooke, CTC Publisher & Editorial Director, [email protected] CONTENT • FEATURE ARTICLES Randi White Vice Pres./Associate Publisher, [email protected] What is an Airline Ticket Consolidator . 1 Maria Lisella The Insider’s Guide to Air Consolidators . 2 Editor, [email protected] Chantal Guillou-Brennan Art & Production Director, [email protected] Changing Times . 3 Marjorie Vincent International Air Consolidator Value Proposition . 3 Business Manager, [email protected] Demystifying Consolidators . 4 Katie Hultgren Editorial Assistant, Listings and Circulation Manager The Travel Agents’ Source for Consolidator Airfares . 21 [email protected] Clifton N. Cooke, CTC. Founding Publisher & Editor-at-Large, [email protected] a c i r e c m i Worldwide Correspondents f i DIRECTORY OF A c l a a Tom Bross: Austria & Germany g r P a n t i c s i Katharine Dyson: Special Interests t n h s r t t a e e e r s Patricia Earnest: North America u C n n e a i ADVERTISERS o m a E s p S e A Marian Goldberg, Asia & u e e O b l B h & h p a s / b d t Danielle Hayes: Africa, South America t i r c t o r i a r d u s r i a i r o r a f s o u e Kathy Feeney: Southeast Correspondent & FACT FINDER i N S A A C M E F Y Denise Mattia: Caribbean/Mexico PAGE# Merrie Murray: Mediterannean J.
    [Show full text]
  • Accidents & Injuries in Air Law: the Clash of the Titans
    ACCIDENTS & INJURIES IN AIR LAW: THE CLASH OF THE TITANS . by Paul Stephen Dempsey INTRODUCTION When the Warsaw Convention of 1929 or the Montreal Convention of 1999 is deemed to apply,1 the court must determine whether recovery is permitted under it. The most critical provision in much personal injury and wrongful death litigation surrounding international commercial aviation is Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention, which provides: The carrier shall be liable for damage sustained in the event of the death or wounding of a passenger or any other bodily injury suffered by a passenger, if the accident which . Copyright © 2008 by Paul Stephen Dempsey. Readers are encouraged to consult the treatise International Air Carrier Liability: The Montreal Convention of 1999 (McGill 2005) by Paul Stephen Dempsey and Michael Milde, for a broader treatment of the issues discussed herein. Tomlinson Professor of Global Governance in Air & Space Law, and Director of the Institute of Air & Space Law, McGill University. From 1979-2002, Dr. Dempsey was Professor of Law & Director of the Transportation Law Program, University of Denver College of Law. A.B.J. (1972), J.D. (1975), University of Georgia; LL.M. (1978), George Washington University; D.C.L. (1986), McGill University. Admitted to the practice of law in Colorado, Georgia, and the District of Columbia. 1 Pursuant to Article 1, the treaty applies when travel is according to an international itinerary originating and destined to two different contracting States, or from and to a single contracting State
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Eastern District of Michigan Southern Division
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION DARREN SENSAT, Plaintiff, Case Number 17-12468 v. Honorable David M. Lawson SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO., Defendant. ______________________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiff Darren Sensat injured his left foot and ankle while boarding a Southwest Airlines flight departing from the Dominican Republic destined for the United States. He says that his foot became lodged in a gap between the tread and riser of the airstairs that the airline used for passenger boarding at that airport. Sensat brought suit under Article 17 of the Montreal Convention, which renders air carriers liable to passengers injured by accidents that occur on board the aircraft or during embarking or disembarking. Defendant Southwest Airlines has moved for summary judgment contending that the undisputed facts show that Sensat’s injuries did not result from an “accident.” Because the record demonstrates otherwise, the motion will be denied. I. The injury occurred on April 9, 2017. Sensat was a passenger on Southwest Flight 1239 from Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic, returning to the United States after a family vacation. He arrived at the airport with his family about two hours before their scheduled departure on a clear sunny day. Sensat checked his bags and carried on a small backpack with personal items that weighed 10 to 12 pounds. He was wearing shorts and athletic running shoes. When the boarding time was called for their flight, passengers went outside the terminal and waited for a bus that drove them across the tarmac to where the plane was parked.
    [Show full text]
  • FSB ION 2016-02 Unsafe Airspace
    08 JUN 16 INTERNATIONAL OPS NOTICE No. 02/2016 \\\ Flight Service Bureau® ISSUED BY FLIGHT SERVICE BUREAU INTERNATIONAL SITA HNLFSXH AKLFSXH AFTN KMCOXAAL OPS NOTICE 02/16 EMAIL [email protected] SUBJECT: UNSAFE AIRSPACE SUMMARY VALID DATE: 08 JUN 2016 Situation/Event With the events surrounding the shootdown of MAS17, risk assessment of potentially unsafe airspace has given far greater weighting to the Guidance situation on the ground. Access to reliable information to determine the ever-changing risk level, is by nature This document is intended to provide operator of it’s inherent uncertainty, challenging. Through FSB guidance in determining whether to avoid specific Briefings and the work of The Airline Cooperative® , airspaces. Exclusion from this advice, naturally, does we aim to provide operators with a useful summary of not mean that other airspace is risk free. the current situation. Information Sources Danger The countries that issue the most relevant updates for In assessing risk to flight over each countries borders, unsafe airspace are: two scenarios are predominant for civil flight: 1. Risk of shootdown, inadvertent or intentional. • US (FAA) – through FDC Notams and SFARs 2. Aircraft emergency requiring a landing. • UK (NATS) – AIP and Notam • Germany (DFS) – Notam Both these elements are taken into consideration in • France (DGAC)- AIC. determining a classification. The highest level of risk here is “Moderate”, on the basis that calling it “high” or In general, the Civil Aviation Authorities of the “severe” would exaggerate the actual level or risk in countries whose airspace is determined to be unsafe landing or overflying the territories concerned.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court District of Massachusetts
    Case 3:19-cv-30007-MGM Document 45 Filed 12/28/20 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS JENNIFER MOORE, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 19-30007-MGM BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC, a foreign corporation, Defendant. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND PLAINTIFF’S CROSS-MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Dkt. Nos. 33, 37) December 28, 2020 MASTROIANNI, U.S.D.J. I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Jennifer Moore was traveling as a passenger on a British Airways flight when she suffered an injury while disembarking from the airplane. Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant British Airways for damages under the Montreal Convention (Count One) and for negligence (Count Two). Defendant has moved for summary judgment on all claims. (Dkt. No. 33.) With her opposition, Plaintiff late-filed a cross-motion for partial summary judgment that the incident at issue was an “accident” under the Montreal Convention. (Dkt. No. 37.) The court heard arguments on the motions on December 2, 2020. For the reasons discussed, the court will grant Defendant’s motion and deny Plaintiff’s motion. II. BACKGROUND On September 14 and 15, 2018, Plaintiff was traveling as a passenger on British Airways Flight 202 from Boston, Massachusetts to London, England as part of round-trip transportation. Case 3:19-cv-30007-MGM Document 45 Filed 12/28/20 Page 2 of 9 Upon arrival at London Heathrow Airport, due to a broken jet bridge, the passengers disembarked by portable stairs. British Airways and other air carriers commonly use a mobile staircase to disembark passengers when a jet bridge is unavailable.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Field Preemption Should Apply to the Federal Aviation Act
    Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 85 Issue 3 Article 5 2020 Bet on the Field: Why Field Preemption Should Apply to the Federal Aviation Act Jack Milligan Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation Jack Milligan, Bet on the Field: Why Field Preemption Should Apply to the Federal Aviation Act, 85 J. AIR L. & COM. 507 (2020) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol85/iss3/5 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. BET ON THE FIELD: WHY FIELD PREEMPTION SHOULD APPLY TO THE FEDERAL AVIATION ACT JACK MILLIGAN* ABSTRACT One of the primary challenges facing the American aviation industry is the issue of federal preemption. Although Congress has a long history of heavy involvement in regulating the avia- tion industry, the Federal Aviation Act (FAAct) does not include an express preemption provision, leaving states, courts, and in- dustry members with little guidance about the proper reach of federal and state regulations. The circuit courts are sharply di- vided on their approaches and answers to this question. The is- sue of preemption is especially important in the context of aviation manufacturing, where the federal government has pre- scribed a litany of different safety standards, but state law prod- uct liability claims continue to be governed by state law standards of care.
    [Show full text]
  • Ndj JVSD & LMM 180503 09 Numéro Double V3
    lundi 7 mai 2018 10:50 Objet : NdJ JVSD & LMM 180503_09 numéro double v3 Date : lundi 7 mai 2018 10:32 De : AssociationAAM <[email protected]> À : Membres AssocAAM <[email protected]> Catégorie : NDJ ! NOUVELLES du JOUR ! ! INFOLETTRE INTERNE ET CONFIDENTIELLE DE L’ASSOCIATION DES ADMINISTRATEURS DES AFFAIRES MARITIMES N° 180503_09 • diffusion étendue par accord entre associations aux PEM membres de l’AP3M « À LA MER, TOUT SE TIENT, LES SCIENCES & LES ARTS, LES ARMES & LES LOIS ! » ! PROCHAINS RDV AAM ET AP3M (détails et autres prévisions dans la partie agenda – s’inscrire par retour de mail) Ce sera le 15 mai à l’occasion des CA ouverts de nos deux associations. Et aussi, en prélude à nos CA, à l’occasion de la remise du prix associatif “PLACE DE FONTENOY” à notre camarade l’AG Roger JAFFRAY. ! IL EST RAPPELÉ QUE : • la réception des NdJ est réservée aux membres de notre association et maintenant aux PEM membres de l’AP3M • pour autant qu’ils soient à jour de leur cotisation de l’année N-1 au moins ! ADMISSIONS, AFFECTATIONS, MUTATION, NOMINATIONS & PROMOTIONS CGMF Par décret du Président de la République en date du 27 avril 2018, M. Philippe ILLIONNET est renouvelé dans ses fonctions de président de la société par actions simplifiée Compagnie générale maritime et financière (CGMF). CGDD Par arrêté du Premier ministre et du ministre d'Etat, ministre de la transition écologique et solidaire, en date du 30 avril 2018, Mme Elise CALAIS, administratrice civile hors classe, est nommée sous-directrice de la responsabilité environnementale des acteurs économiques, au sein du service de l'économie, de l'évaluation et de l'intégration du développement durable du commissariat général au développement durable, à l'administration centrale du ministère de la transition écologique et solidaire, pour une durée d'un an, à compter du 16 mai 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • International Air Carrier Liability for Death & Personal Injury: to Infinity and Beyond
    International Air Carrier Liability for Death & Personal Injury: To Infinity and Beyond by Paul Stephen Dempsey Tomlinson Professor Emeritus of Law Director Emeritus , Institute of Air & Space Law McGill University Copyright © 2017 by Paul Stephen Dempsey To what damages do the Warsaw regime and the Montreal Convention apply? Carrier liability for: . Passenger death, bodily injury or delay; . Air freight and baggage loss, damage, or delay; . In international carriage, for compensation. The Convention does not address liability of the airport, ANSP or aircraft manufacturers, or liability for surface damage. What is international air carriage? The place of departure and place of destination are: both in "Warsaw System" or M99 States or in the same "Warsaw System" or M99 State with an agreed stopping place in another State And both States have ratified a common liability Convention or Protocol. You look for the “highest common denominator” treaty between the origin and destination State. In round-trip transportation, the origin and destination State are the same. Which Legal Regime Applies? . The original Warsaw Convention of 1929, unamended; . The Warsaw Convention as amended by Montreal Protocol No. 1 of 1975; . The Warsaw Convention as amended by the Hague Protocol of 1955; . The Warsaw Convention as amended by the Hague Protocol and Montreal Protocol No. 2 of 1975; . The Warsaw Convention as amended by the Hague Protocol and Montreal Protocol No. 4 of 1975; . The Montreal Convention of 1999, or . Domestic law, if it is deemed that the transportation falls outside the conventional international law regime, or if the two relevant States have failed to ratify the same liability convention.
    [Show full text]
  • Carriage of Goods by Air: a Guide to the International Legal Framework
    Distr. GENERAL UNCTAD/SDTE/TLB/2006/1 27 June 2006 ENGLISH ONLY UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT CARRIAGE OF GOODS BY AIR: A GUIDE TO THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK Report by the UNCTAD secretariat TABLE OF CONTENTS Paragraphs Background and Introduction ...................................................................................... 1-8 A. GENERAL OVERVIEW OF THE INTERNATIONAL LIABILITY FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................................ 9-54 I. The Warsaw System of Conventions ..................................................................... 9-32 1. Warsaw Convention 1929 .............................................................................. 9-18 2. Hague Protocol 1955 ........................................................................................ 19-22 3. Guadalajara Convention 1961 ......................................................................... 23-24 4. Guatemala City Protocol 1971 ......................................................................... 25 5. Montreal Additional Protocols Numbers 1, 2, and 3 of 1975........................... 26-28 6. Montreal Additional Protocol Number 4 of 1975 ............................................ 29-32 II. Montreal Convention 1999..................................................................................... 33-39 III. How to determine the applicable international air convention............................... 40-51 IV. Implications for national implementation
    [Show full text]