Air Carrier’s Liability for Aviation Injuries in Nigeria: Rethinking Harkar Air Services v. Okeazor and Oparaji v. Virgin Atlantic Limited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International air carrier’s liability under Nigerian law has, for time past been shrouded in uncertainty because of the ambivalence with which Nigerian courts applied the Warsaw Convention 1929 and Montreal Convention to damages that passengers suffer on board an aircraft. The kind of injury for which compensation may be obtained under the Montreal Convention is of great topical interest because of the attitude of courts in various jurisdictions globally. This article will attempt to examine how the issue of recoverable damages has been seen in several common law countries particularly United States, Australia, and Canada through case law analysis and comparison. After a quick survey of the relevant rules of the law of damages in the countries involved, the various decisions relating to damages under the Warsaw and Montreal Convention will be outlined. Against this background, two Nigerian decisions dealing with compensation for international air travel i.e. Harkar Air Services v. Okeazor and Oparaji v. Virgin Atlantic will be analysed with a view to highlighting the inadequacy and recommending a better approach to interpreting the relevant international conventions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".