The Montreal Convention: Your Rights If You're Injured on an International Flight

Oct 12

A meal cart slams into your knee somewhere over the Atlantic. Severe turbulence throws you into the cabin ceiling on a flight to Tokyo. A flight attendant spills scalding coffee in your lap on the way home from Cancún. When an injury happens on an international flight, the rules that decide whether — and how much — the airline must pay you are not found in ordinary state personal injury law. They are found in an international treaty: the Montreal Convention.

The Montreal Convention can be very favorable to injured passengers. But it also contains strict rules that catch people off guard, including a hard two-year deadline and a long line of court decisions limiting recovery for emotional distress. This article explains how the Convention works, what you can recover, and why the difference between a physical injury and an emotional one matters so much.

What Is the Montreal Convention?

The Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air, signed in Montreal on May 28, 1999, is a treaty that sets uniform rules for airline liability on international flights. This article focuses on what the Convention means for passengers who are injured or killed.

The United States ratified the Montreal Convention, and it took effect for the U.S. in November 2003. It replaced the older Warsaw Convention of 1929 for flights between countries that have joined it. Today, the large majority of the world's nations are parties.

Full text (U.S. Senate Treaty Document 106-45): Convention for International Carriage by Air — GovInfo

When Does the Montreal Convention Apply?

The Convention applies to "international carriage," which is defined by your ticket, not by the flight you happened to be on when you were injured. It applies when:

Your place of departure and final destination are in two different countries that are both parties to the Convention; or
Your departure and destination are in the same country that is a party, but your itinerary includes an agreed stopping place in another country (for example, a round trip from Atlanta to London and back).

This leads to a result that surprises many travelers: a purely domestic flight can be governed by the Montreal Convention if it is part of an international itinerary. If you are injured on the Atlanta-to-Chicago leg of a ticket from Atlanta to Paris, the Convention — not Georgia or Illinois law — likely governs your claim.

The Convention Is Your Exclusive Remedy

When the Montreal Convention applies, it is generally the exclusive path to recovery against the airline. In El Al Israel Airlines v. Tsui Yuan Tseng (1999), the U.S. Supreme Court held — under the predecessor Warsaw Convention — that a passenger who cannot recover under the treaty cannot fall back on state-law claims instead. Article 29 of the Montreal Convention carries that principle forward, and it also bars punitive damages.

Article 17: The Heart of an Injury Claim

Under Article 17(1), an airline is liable for damage sustained in case of death or bodily injury of a passenger if the accident that caused it took place on board the aircraft or in the course of embarking or disembarking.

That sentence contains three requirements, and each has been heavily litigated:

1. There Must Be an "Accident"

In Air France v. Saks (1985), the Supreme Court defined an "accident" as an unexpected or unusual event or happening that is external to the passenger. An injury that results from the passenger's own internal reaction to the normal operation of the aircraft is not an accident. In Saks itself, a passenger who lost hearing in one ear from normal cabin pressure changes could not recover.

Events courts have commonly treated as "accidents" include:

Severe turbulence
Hot beverages or food spilled on a passenger
Bags falling from overhead bins
Collisions with service carts
Hard landings, runway excursions, and crashes
Unusual crew conduct that causes injury

The airline's response to a situation can itself be part of the accident. In Olympic Airways v. Husain (2004), the Supreme Court held that a flight attendant's repeated refusal to move an asthmatic passenger away from cigarette smoke — contrary to industry standards and the airline's own policies — could be an "accident" when it was a link in the chain of events that led to his death.

Whose Perspective Counts? The 2022 Moore v. British Airways Decision

For years, airlines argued that an event is not an "accident" if it is normal in the airline industry — for example, when equipment is standard, properly maintained, and working as designed. A 2022 federal appeals court decision rejected that argument.

In Moore v. British Airways PLC, 32 F.4th 110 (1st Cir. 2022), a passenger flying from Boston to London had to deplane at Heathrow by mobile staircase because the jet bridge was not working. Each step on the staircase was about 7.4 inches high — except the final step to the ground, which was roughly 13 inches. No airline employee was at the bottom of the stairs, and no one warned passengers about the taller last step. She fell and was seriously injured. The trial court ruled for British Airways, reasoning that there was no evidence the step height was unusual for mobile staircases and that the stairs were free of defects.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit vacated that ruling and held:

"Unexpected" and "unusual" are separate questions. Because Saks uses the word "or," an event can be an accident if it is unexpected — even if it is common in the industry.
Whether an event is unexpected is judged from the perspective of a reasonable passenger with ordinary experience in commercial air travel — not from the perspective of the airline or the aviation industry, and not from the injured passenger's purely personal expectations.
The passenger does not have to prove the airline was negligent. Compliance with regulations and industry standards is relevant evidence, but it does not decide the question.

The court sent the case back for a jury to decide whether the final step was an accident, and the case later settled before trial. Moore gives injured passengers a stronger argument that conditions which would catch an ordinary traveler off guard can be "accidents" under the Montreal Convention — even when those conditions meet industry norms.

2. It Must Happen On Board or During Embarking/Disembarking

Injuries in the aircraft cabin are clearly covered. Injuries on a jet bridge, on air stairs, or while being escorted to or from the aircraft may also be covered. Courts generally look at the passenger's activity at the time, whose control the passenger was under, and the passenger's location. An injury in a general area of the terminal, far from the gate, is often outside the Convention — and in those cases, state law usually applies instead.

3. There Must Be Death or "Bodily Injury"

This requirement is where the line between physical and emotional harm is drawn — and it is the most important issue many injured passengers face.

Physical Injury vs. Emotional Distress

The Rule: Purely Emotional Injury Is Not Recoverable

In Eastern Airlines v. Floyd (1991), passengers experienced terrifying moments when all three engines of their aircraft failed and the crew prepared to ditch in the ocean. The crew restarted an engine and landed safely. The passengers sued for the emotional distress of believing they were about to die.

The Supreme Court held that the treaty's "bodily injury" language does not allow recovery for purely mental or psychic injuries unaccompanied by physical injury. Courts have applied the same rule under the Montreal Convention, which uses the same "bodily injury" wording.

The practical result: a passenger who suffers genuine, lasting fear or anxiety after a near-disaster — but no physical injury — generally cannot recover against the airline under the Convention.

The Open Question: Emotional Distress With a Physical Injury

Floyd expressly left open whether passengers who suffer both physical and emotional harm can recover for the emotional component. Federal courts have answered that question differently:

Approach	Leading Case	What Emotional Damages Are Recoverable
Narrow ("caused by the bodily injury")	Ehrlich v. American Airlines, 360 F.3d 366 (2d Cir. 2004)	Only emotional harm that flows from the physical injury itself — for example, distress about a fractured wrist and the pain of recovery. Fear and terror caused by the accident itself are not recoverable.
Broader ("caused by the accident")	Doe v. Etihad Airways, 870 F.3d 406 (6th Cir. 2017)	Once a passenger suffers a bodily injury caused by the accident, the passenger may recover damages for emotional harm caused by the accident, even if that emotional harm did not flow from the physical injury.

In Doe v. Etihad, a passenger was pricked by a used hypodermic needle left in a seat pocket. The physical injury was minor, but her fear of contracting a serious disease was significant. The Sixth Circuit, focusing on the Montreal Convention's text, allowed her to pursue damages for that emotional harm.

This split matters. Because the Montreal Convention offers a choice of where to file suit (discussed below), the jurisdiction where a case is brought can affect what emotional damages are available.

What About PTSD?

Some passengers have argued that post-traumatic stress disorder should count as a "bodily injury" because it can involve measurable physical changes in the brain. At least one federal district court accepted that argument with supporting medical evidence (Weaver, D. Mont. 1999), but many courts have rejected it. This remains a developing and fact-specific area that depends heavily on expert medical testimony.

Why Documenting Physical Injuries Matters

Because recovery for emotional distress usually depends on a physical injury, it is critical to document every physical injury after an in-flight incident — even ones that seem minor at the time, such as bruising, whiplash, burns, cuts, or a jarred back. Seek medical evaluation promptly, and tell the provider exactly how the injury happened.

How Much Can You Recover? The Two-Tier Liability System

The Montreal Convention does not impose a cap on proven damages for death or bodily injury. Instead, Article 21 creates two tiers. The tier amounts are stated in Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), an international monetary unit, and are reviewed by ICAO every five years. The most recent increase took effect on December 28, 2024.

Tier	Amount	Airline's Liability
Tier 1	Up to 151,880 SDRs (roughly $200,000, depending on exchange rates)	Strict liability. The airline cannot avoid paying by showing it was not negligent. The only defense is the passenger's own contributory negligence (Article 20).
Tier 2	Above 151,880 SDRs — no upper limit	The airline is liable unless it proves the damage was not due to its negligence or wrongful act, or was due solely to the negligence of a third party. The burden is on the airline.

You must still prove your actual damages — medical expenses, lost income, pain and suffering, and (where recoverable) emotional distress. The tiers determine how difficult it is for the airline to avoid paying those proven damages.

Other Key Provisions Every Injured Passenger Should Know

Advance Payments (Article 28)

Where required by a country's national law, an airline must make advance payments without delay to help injured passengers and families meet immediate economic needs. An advance payment is not an admission of liability and may be offset against the final recovery.

Where You Can Sue (Article 33)

For death or injury claims, a passenger may generally sue in the courts of:

The airline's domicile
The airline's principal place of business
The place where the contract (ticket) was made, if the airline has a place of business there
The place of final destination
The passenger's principal and permanent residence, if the airline operates service there (the "fifth jurisdiction")

The fifth jurisdiction is especially important for American travelers injured on foreign airlines. It often allows a U.S. resident to bring the claim at home rather than in a foreign court.

The Two-Year Deadline (Article 35)

The right to damages is extinguished if an action is not brought within two years of the date of arrival at the destination, the date the aircraft should have arrived, or the date the carriage stopped. Courts generally treat this as a strict condition, not an ordinary statute of limitations that can be paused or extended. Missing it can permanently end your claim.

What If Your Flight Was Purely Domestic?

If your ticket was entirely domestic — for example, a round trip from Atlanta to Denver — the Montreal Convention does not apply. Your claim is generally governed by state law. State-law rules on emotional distress damages vary significantly and must be evaluated case by case.

What to Do After an Injury on an International Flight

Report the incident to the flight crew before leaving the aircraft and ask that it be documented.
Photograph your injuries, the area where the incident occurred, and anything involved (a cart, a spilled beverage, a fallen bag).
Collect names and contact information of witnesses.
Get medical care promptly and describe all symptoms, physical and emotional.
Do not sign releases or accept settlement offers until after consulting with an aviation attorney — and consult one as quickly as possible, well before the two-year deadline.

Key Legal Resources

Injured on an International Flight?

Montreal Convention claims turn on technical questions and carry a strict two-year deadline. If you were injured, don't wait to get advice. Contact a lawyer as soon as you are able.

The Airline Lawyer is America's premier law firm for airline injury cases. Attorney Mahmoud "Mach" Khatib spent over 18 years working for Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines. As an airline insider, he has an unparalleled understanding of airline operations and theories of liability. That's why The Airline Lawyer is the ace for your airline injury case.

Schedule a Free Consultation →

The Airline Lawyer is the registered trade name of Khatib Law LLC. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

Mahmoud Khatib