A Study on Carrier s Liability Requirements for Passengers in International Carriage by air: Focusing on the effects of COVID-19 on Accident, Bodily injury and Mental injury(PTSD) -
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The international air carriage industry has undergone many changes in legal systems since the Warsaw system in the past based on the quantitative growth of the related market. However, the Montreal Convention(1999) still had the same problems as it made the error of repeating the existing problems while modernizing the Warsaw Convention. In such a situation, the aviation industry has been hit unprecedentedly by the global infectious disease called the COVID-19 pandemic. The first issue is the definition of ‘accident’ in the Warsaw Convention and the Montreal Convention on Passenger Injury under the problems of the Convention and the circumstances of the times. The U.S. and European Supreme Courts define an “accident” as an unexpected, unusual, external event to the passenger. However, the European Court of Justice (CJEU) deviated from the conventional interpretation by not requiring a risk of air travel or in connection with the operation of the aircraft. Presumably, this is a judgment that will be very welcomed according to the trend of the times, as it focuses on protecting the interests of passengers by expanding the scope of ‘accidents’. In addition, since infection of COVID-19 in an aircraft corresponds to an ‘unusual or unexpected, external event to the passenger’, it can constitute an ‘accident’ under the Convention. The second issue is whether mental injuries are included in “bodily injury”. In order to examine this issue, the changes in related theories and precedents were examined by classifying bodily injuries by type. As it turns out, especially with regard to pure mental injury, the court denied the air carrier s liability. Therefore, it seems difficult to accept liability for air carriers on the basis of post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD), which is a type of pure mental injury. On the other hand, in many US courts, the liability for compensation was affirmed by acknowledging the causal connection for mental injury flowing from physical harm(bodily injury). Furthermore, the latest precedent does not require a causal connection between bodily injury and mental injury, thus confirming that an amendment to the provisions of Article 17 of the Montreal Convention to explicitly stipulate ‘mental injury’ is necessary for the protection of air passengers. In addition, this case is an important case that can be the basis for compensation for mental damages related to COVID-19 infection in aircraft in the current Covid-19 situation, and this study is judged to be more meaningful for preparation for the post-COVID era.
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 | 0.007 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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".