If this is a domestic flight, then the laws of the country take precedence (i.e., everyone else’s guesswork answers probably apply.)
If this is an international flight, however, the Warsaw Convention covers this. According to Clauses 17 and 18 of the Warsaw Convention, the airline is liable for any injury (to people, clause 17) or damage (to property, clause 18) that occurs during the flight.
As for liability, everything depends on what jurisdiction you’ll be able to work. If it will be the European (continental – based on Napoleonic Code) law, then you’re liable for every damage you have caused, and the factor of ‘recklessness’ or ‘guilt’ is unimportant.
So the question will arise, who have caused the damage to the laptop, which is not obvious.
If you place your laptop on the middle of the street, and someones drive on it, you will be the one that have damaged it – by placing it on the middle of the street – not the driver. So if you place your laptop in unadequate place, and therefore the damage, you can expect the court will find you responsible for the damage.
But if you have placed your laptop on the desk, and the passanger before you have reclined rapidly without looking back, they will be most likely responsible for the damage – the same as if they throw it out of your hand by rapid movement.
However, if you can prove, that the seats are so designed, that such damages are too likely to happen, the airline may be made responsible – it all depends on what the judge will find ‘too likely’ or ‘badly designed’. If the seat decline when pressing a button which is easy to press accidentally, it’s very likely the responsibility of the airline.
It would be hard to find suitable precedent, because each of such cases will be handled individually.
In most juristictions that operate with something approaching sanity, someone is liable for accidental damage in the following three cases:
They caused the damage deliberately or with “blameworthy carelessness”.
They have entered into a contract where they explicitly accept to be responsible for the risk.
The law contains an explicit exception for the situation and says they are liable in the situation even without wrongdoing or contract (“strict liability”). For example, in most places the owner of an aircraft is liable for any damage it causes even if the owner did nothing wrong and the one who suffered the damage is not a passenger.
In the present question it seems that the only thing that could possibly apply is whether the passenger who reclined his seat would be liable under theory (1). It seems to be easy enough to argue that he was being careless, but what a court will have to decide is then whether this carelessness was “blameworthy” (my word, but different jurisdictions use various legal codewords for essentially this concept) — in other words, was or wasn’t he less careful that one could reasonably expect people in general to be?
I suspect that most courts would come to the conclusion that no, one cannot in general expect passengers not to recline their seats when the airline provides a seat that can recline — and no, one cannot in general expect passengers to always ask they guy behind them before they recline, however nice it would be if everyone did that. So it will rule that the guy was not “blameworthily” careless, and can’t be liable.
You could certainly have your day in court trying to convince it otherwise, though, if you find a court with jurisdiction over the passenger.
From a common sense point of view – #5 …. its an accident, deal with it.
In the hands of a lawyer – #1, #3 & #6 …. the shotgun approach, sue them all and hope one settles rather than fight the case in court.
Credit:stackoverflow.com‘
4 Mar, 2024
5 Mar, 2024
5 Mar, 2024