MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7123700581 · doi:10.22397/bml.2025.34.207

A Study on Compensation for Pure Mental Injury Caused by Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in International Carriage by air : Focusing on the CJEU Decision in Case C-111/21

2025· article· W7123700581 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hun-Beom Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmCompensation (psychology)Economic JusticeLiabilityPoison controlTortPsychological traumaAccidentalPersonal injuryConvention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Article 17 of the Montreal Convention limits carrier liability to cases of “death or bodily injury,” which has traditionally excluded pure psychological harm such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from compensation. This resulted from the bodily-injury-centered structure inherited from the Warsaw Convention, designed to protect the aviation industry and restrict liability. Consequently, psychological injury was recognized only when connected to bodily injury. Yet, the medical recognition of psychiatric disorders, strengthened passenger-rights standards, and the rise of atypical aviation incidents—including infectious-disease exposure, terrorism-related trauma, and forcible deplaning—have amplified calls for the autonomous legal protection of psychological injury. The Court of Justice of the European Union's BT v. Laudamotion (2022) judgment marks a turning point by expressly acknowledging the compensability of psychological injury independent of bodily injury. Relying on the Vienna Convention's treaty-interpretation rules, the Convention's travaux préparatoires, and its teleological goals of fair compensation and balanced interests, the Court reframed the interpretive question as whether clinically significant psychological harm caused by an aircraft accident must be compensable. It held that psychological injury not linked to bodily injury may fall within Article 17 when its severity equals that of bodily injury resulting from the same accident. To prevent unlimited liability, the CJEU imposed strict conditions, requiring objective medical evidence of psychological impairment, serious deterioration of health, and the necessity of medical treatment. This shifts the evidentiary structure from proving a causal link between psychological and bodily injury to a model of conditional—but independent—recognition. This study situates the Laudamotion judgment within ongoing debates on expanding protection for psychological injury and potential textual reforms of the Montreal Convention. It aims to evaluate the judgment's contribution to opening compensation for PTSD without altering the structural core of Article 17 and to explore future directions for reconstructing the legal framework of psychological-injury protection in international air carriage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternational Law and Aviation→French-language works237,207→