Immaterial Compensation for Passenger Who Had Traumatic Experiences in Air Passenger Transport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main purpose of this article is to analyze the compensation for immaterial loss for the passenger carriage by air transportation based Warsaw Convention and Montreal Convention. This article will answer several of these questions: (a) whether the air carrier shall be held liable to compensate the passenger who suffered mental distress during the flight, (b) which regimes shall govern the liability of the parties in that matter, (c) does that matter could also be seen from national law, and (d) could mental distress still be considered as an injury which may be compensated. The method used will be the legal dogmatic method. Regardless, damages for mental injuries unaccompanied by physical trauma resulting from an ‘accident’ occurring while an individual is on an international flight should be compensable. Furthermore, although a majority of jurisdiction continue to adhere to the traditional rule requiring some form of physical injury in order to obtain damage for mental injury, courts so far has been trying to overcome the mindset of the physical injury requirement as a guarantee of the genuineness of claims for mental distress.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".