This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/27/germanwings-crash-lufthansa-could-face-huge-compensation-claims

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Germanwings crash: Lufthansa could face huge compensation claims Germanwings crash: Lufthansa could face huge compensation claims
(35 minutes later)
The German flag carrier airline Lufthansa and its Germanwings subsidiary could be liable for compensation claims running into hundreds of millions of pounds unless they can prove that the crash of Flight 4U9525, which ploughed into a rock-strewn French Alpine hillside on Tuesday killing all 150 people on board, was not their fault. The German flagcarrier airline Lufthansa and its Germanwings subsidiary could be liable for compensation claims running into hundreds of millions of pounds unless they can prove that the crash of Flight 4U9525, which ploughed into a French Alpine hillside on Tuesday killing all 150 people on board was not their fault.
Legal experts said that on the evidence that has emerged so far – which suggests the plane’s co-pilot crashed it deliberately, had a history of depression and psychiatric problems, and was suffering form an undisclosed illness – the airline would find it difficult to mount such a defence.Legal experts said that on the evidence that has emerged so far – which suggests the plane’s co-pilot crashed it deliberately, had a history of depression and psychiatric problems, and was suffering form an undisclosed illness – the airline would find it difficult to mount such a defence.
“To avoid paying unlimited compensation, they have to show the crash was not due to negligence, omission or a wrongful act either by them, or by their servants or agents,” said Clive Garner, head of aviation law at legal firm Irwin Mitchell, which has represented passengers’ families in similar cases.“To avoid paying unlimited compensation, they have to show the crash was not due to negligence, omission or a wrongful act either by them, or by their servants or agents,” said Clive Garner, head of aviation law at legal firm Irwin Mitchell, which has represented passengers’ families in similar cases.
“We should be cautious, of course. But in reality, based on what we know at this point, they are not going to be able to establish that. Whether it was a deliberate act or negligence, they’re going to be liable for a large sum of money.”“We should be cautious, of course. But in reality, based on what we know at this point, they are not going to be able to establish that. Whether it was a deliberate act or negligence, they’re going to be liable for a large sum of money.”
Garners said the sums involved would be substantial. “It depends on the families’ circumstances – how much the passenger earned, how many dependents there are,” he said. “But seven-figure claims per family are by no means unusual.”Garners said the sums involved would be substantial. “It depends on the families’ circumstances – how much the passenger earned, how many dependents there are,” he said. “But seven-figure claims per family are by no means unusual.”
A French public prosecutor said on Thursday that audio data from the plane’s cockpit voice recorder showed the 28-year-old co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz, had waited until the captain left the cockpit, locked him out, and set the plane on a course to crash. A French public prosecutor said on Thursday that audio data from the plane’s cockpit voice recorder showed that the 28-year-old co-pilot, Andreas Lubitz, had waited until the captain left the cockpit, before locking him out and setting the plane on a course to crash.
It was claimed on Friday that the co-pilot had spent 18 months in psychiatric treatment and had been designated “not suitable for flying” by the Lufthansa pilot training centre. Bild newspaper also said he had to repeat classes because of depression, needed ongoing medical assessment, and was given a special coding on his pilot’s licence.It was claimed on Friday that the co-pilot had spent 18 months in psychiatric treatment and had been designated “not suitable for flying” by the Lufthansa pilot training centre. Bild newspaper also said he had to repeat classes because of depression, needed ongoing medical assessment, and was given a special coding on his pilot’s licence.
The prosecutor’s office in Dusseldorf, where Lubitz had a flat, said a police search had uncovered a number of torn-up medical documents “indicating an ongoing illness and appropriate medical treatment” that Lubitz appeared to be concealing “from his employer and professional circles.” The prosecutor’s office in Dusseldorf, where Lubitz had a flat, said a police search had uncovered a number of torn-up medical documents “indicating an ongoing illness and appropriate medical treatment” that Lubitz appeared to be concealing “from his employer and professional circles”.
Lufthansa has so far said only that Lubitz was “100% fit to fly” and that there was “no system in the world” that could have predicted or prevented his actions. “We choose our staff very strictly,” Carsten Spohr, the company’s chief executive, said on Thursday. “The choice of staff is very strict - we not only take into account their technical knowledge but also the psychological aspect of our staff.” Lufthansa has so far said only that Lubitz was “100% fit to fly” and that there was “no system in the world” that could have predicted or prevented his actions. “We choose our staff very strictly,” Carsten Spohr, the company’s chief executive, said on Thursday. “The choice of staff is very strict we not only take into account their technical knowledge but also the psychological aspect of our staff.”
The crash is a major blow to the highly respected carrier and its low-cost but equally well regarded subsidiary, both of which have formidable safety records: the company’s last fatal accident was more than 20 years ago, and it has recorded only nine flight-related deaths in 40 years.The crash is a major blow to the highly respected carrier and its low-cost but equally well regarded subsidiary, both of which have formidable safety records: the company’s last fatal accident was more than 20 years ago, and it has recorded only nine flight-related deaths in 40 years.
Lufthansa has struggled recently against stiff competition from budget airlines like Ryanair and easyJet on its European routes, and rivals such as Emirates and Turkish on long-haul flights. Two years ago it announced plans to shed 3,500 jobs as part of a major cost-cutting and restructuring exercise that has brought it into fierce conflict with pilots and other staff. Lufthansa has struggled recently against stiff competition from budget airlines like Ryanair and easyJet on its European routes, and rivals such as Emirates and Turkish on long-haul flights. Two years ago, it announced plans to shed 3,500 jobs as part of a major cost-cutting and restructuring exercise that has brought it into fierce conflict with pilots and other staff.
Staff are deeply unhappy at Lufthansa’s attempts to expand budget flights through another low-cost subsidiary, Eurowings, which is not covered by the same expensive wage deals and collective agreements as the parent company and Germanwings. Pilots, in particular, object to plans to scrap a scheme that allows them to retire at 55 on 60% of salary that the company says it can no longer afford.Staff are deeply unhappy at Lufthansa’s attempts to expand budget flights through another low-cost subsidiary, Eurowings, which is not covered by the same expensive wage deals and collective agreements as the parent company and Germanwings. Pilots, in particular, object to plans to scrap a scheme that allows them to retire at 55 on 60% of salary that the company says it can no longer afford.
Ten separate strikes cost the company more than €230m last year, while further industrial action last month grounded some 1,600 flights, affecting more than 220,000 passengers. Earlier this month the company reported that profits had fallen almost 11% in 2014, to €252m, at its core German airlines Lufthansa and Germanwings. Ten separate strikes cost the company more than €230m last year, while further industrial action last month grounded 1,600 flights, affecting more than 220,000 passengers. Earlier this month, the company reported that profits had fallen almost 11% in 2014, to €252m, at its core German airlines, Lufthansa and Germanwings.
Paul Hayes, safety and insurance director at aviation consultancy Ascend Worldwide, said Lufthansa was a “strong, well known, responsible brand” that “ticks all the boxes for what we want in a quality airline”. But public perceptions would be affected by media coverage of Flight 4U9525, particularly “who the media blames”, he said.Paul Hayes, safety and insurance director at aviation consultancy Ascend Worldwide, said Lufthansa was a “strong, well known, responsible brand” that “ticks all the boxes for what we want in a quality airline”. But public perceptions would be affected by media coverage of Flight 4U9525, particularly “who the media blames”, he said.
The effect on an airline’s reputation of an isolated accident is usually transitory, Hayes said. “But the shock we all feel at the idea that a pilot, someone in whom we place our trust to look after us, has apparently killed 149 passengers, and the fact that people might suggest the airline could have picked up on this pilot before … These particular circumstances will have an impact.”The effect on an airline’s reputation of an isolated accident is usually transitory, Hayes said. “But the shock we all feel at the idea that a pilot, someone in whom we place our trust to look after us, has apparently killed 149 passengers, and the fact that people might suggest the airline could have picked up on this pilot before … These particular circumstances will have an impact.”
International conventions, including the Montreal Convention of 1999, mean it is difficult for an airline to escape responsibility for passenger deaths and set a “strict liability” in the event of a crash at around £105,000 per victim. But families can and often do submit compensation claims, including for loss of support and suffering, in excess of that sum. Most are settled out of court, Garner said.International conventions, including the Montreal Convention of 1999, mean it is difficult for an airline to escape responsibility for passenger deaths and set a “strict liability” in the event of a crash at around £105,000 per victim. But families can and often do submit compensation claims, including for loss of support and suffering, in excess of that sum. Most are settled out of court, Garner said.
In the case of Flight 4U9525, suits could be filed in any of several legal jurisdictions, including Germany and Spain, whose nationals made up the majority of the plane’s passengers. But the Airbus, en route from Barcelona to Dusseldorf, carried passengers of 15 different nationalities including Australians, Britons and Americans. In the case of Flight 4U9525, suits could be filed in any of several legal jurisdictions, including Germany and Spain, whose nationals made up the majority of the plane’s passengers. But the Airbus, en route from Barcelona to Düsseldorf, carried passengers of 15 different nationalities including Australians, Britons and Americans.
“I suspect this will negotiate itself out before it gets to court,” Garner said. “But from what we now know, it raises real concerns about adequate screening, medical assessment, all that kind of thing. Pilots are submitted to regular tests, including psychological tests – but when it comes to someone with that kind of background, there are very serious questions to be answered: should he have been allowed to fly, and should he have been more closely monitored?” “I suspect this will negotiate itself out before it gets to court,” Garner said. “But from what we now know, it raises real concerns about adequate screening, medical assessment, all that kind of thing. Pilots are submitted to regular tests, including psychological tests – but when it comes to someone with that kind of background, there are very serious questions to be answered: should he have been allowed to fly, and should he have been more closely monitored.”