The passengers said during the trial that they saw the passenger in question sitting and drinking at the airport for several hours, and was heavily intoxicated before the KLM flight was due to take off from Stavanger Airport for Amsterdam on this day in October 2022.
The passenger was still allowed to board the plane, but before the plane could take off, the crew decided that the passenger was still not allowed on the flight.
This caused the flight to be delayed, and meant that the passengers could not catch their onward flight from Amsterdam.
The two passengers demanded compensation from KLM, but were refused because they believed that the delay was due to an extraordinary circumstance. After the Conciliation Council in Ullensaker acquitted KLM in January this year, they chose to sue the airline.
Romerike and Glåmdal have now awarded the passengers compensation.
– As it concerns an intoxicated passenger, there is therefore evidence to believe that the person in question was already visibly intoxicated upon boarding, as the plaintiff states, writes the district court.
They believe that the airline should therefore have discovered that the passenger was drunk, and refused to board so that the delay situation could not occur.
The passengers were awarded 1,200 euros in compensation, in addition to KLM having to pay their legal costs.
#Passengers #compensation #drunk #man #delays #flight
**Interview with Legal Expert on Passenger Compensation Ruling Against KLM**
**Interviewer**: Today, we’re joined by legal expert Dr. Anna Hagen to discuss the recent court ruling that awarded compensation to two passengers after a KLM flight delay caused by an intoxicated traveler. Dr. Hagen, can you break down the main points of this case for us?
**Dr. Hagen**: Certainly. The case revolves around two passengers who witnessed another individual consuming alcohol for several hours before their KLM flight from Stavanger to Amsterdam. Although the passenger was visibly intoxicated, they were allowed to board. Eventually, the crew made the decision to deny the passenger entry due to their state, causing a delay that made the other passengers miss connecting flights.
**Interviewer**: What were the consequences of this decision for KLM and those affected?
**Dr. Hagen**: The district court found that KLM should have recognized the passenger’s intoxication before boarding. They ruled that the airline’s failure to do so was a contributing factor to the resulting delay, leading to KLM being ordered to pay the plaintiffs €1,200 in compensation, alongside their legal costs.
**Interviewer**: This raises an important question about responsibility. Should airlines take stricter measures to ensure passenger sobriety before boarding?
**Dr. Hagen**: Absolutely. This case sets a precedent that airlines have a duty of care to manage their passengers and ensure safety. It opens the floor for a broader discussion on how airlines handle intoxicated individuals and their policies regarding serving alcohol in airports.
**Interviewer**: What do you think readers will make of this ruling? Should passengers feel more empowered to hold airlines accountable, or are there concerns about overreach?
**Dr. Hagen**: That’s a fascinating debate. Readers might feel empowered knowing they can seek compensation for inconveniences caused by such circumstances. On the other hand, some might argue that this could lead to over-regulation of passengers or conflicts regarding personal responsibility. It’s a nuanced discussion that brings several perspectives into play.
