China Eastern Airlines Boeing 737 Crash: Why Are China and Foreign Air Crash Compensation Mechanisms Not Unified? – BBC News in Chinese

Aviation experts often emphasize that the probability of air accidents is much lower than that of land traffic accidents. According to To70, a Dutch aviation consulting company, in 2017, no passenger planes crashed in the world, which is known as the safest year for civil aviation in history; in 2021, A total of 81 people have died in four air crashes worldwide, and 1.3 million people have died in car crashes worldwide over the same period – so compensation for air crash-related deaths and injuries is less common than compensation for car crashes.

In 1999, the member states of the United Nations International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) adopted and signed the “Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air” in Montreal, Canada, commonly known as the 1999 “Montreal Convention” (Montreal Convention). The convention of the same name signed by Warsaw, and several agreements of the same type, unify the world aviation accident compensation standards.

On February 28, 2005, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of China approved the “Montreal Convention” to enter into force in mainland China and the Macao SAR; on September 7, 2006, the State Council of China agreed to extend the scope of application of the Convention to the Hong Kong SAR.

However, this does not mean that the Montreal Convention has become the standard of compensation for all aviation accidents. Article 1 of the Convention states that “this Convention shall apply to all international carriage by aircraft for remuneration of persons, baggage or goods”, but “carriage between two places within the territory of one Party, and If there is no agreed stopping place within the territory of the country, it is not international transportation.”

In other words, the compensation standards for passengers in domestic flight accidents are completely dependent on the laws and regulations of the countries or regions concerned.

China’s current “Regulations on the Limit of Liability for Domestic Air Transport Carriers” was promulgated in 2006, and the source of the regulations is the “Civil Aviation Law”. It stipulates that the “domestic air transport carrier” – that is, the airline – “the limit of liability for each passenger is RMB 400,000″; The payment of the amount does not exempt or reduce the carrier’s liability for compensation.”

Under the joint action of the Civil Aviation Law and the Montreal Convention, airlines generally take out “passenger statutory liability insurance”, also known as “aviation liability insurance”, and transfer statutory liability to insurance companies.

James Healy-Pratt is a senior international aviation lawyer in the UK and is appointed coroner from time to time by the English and Welsh court system, hearing over 100 cases. He pointed out to the BBC Chinese via email that the compensation standards for domestic aviation accidents are indeed different, and are often affected by the level of local living expenses and gross domestic product (GDP).

“It will be fairer for families to incorporate elements of the Montreal Convention into China’s domestic air transport regulations,” Healy-Platt said. “This is already the case in Europe and elsewhere.”

Back in 2014, after the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, Healy-Platt said in a BBC interview: “Families are not treated equally or fairly in a plane crash. (The amount of compensation) depends on individual countries. how to apply its own laws.”

He later commented to the American “Time” magazine that whenever there is an air crash, it is always a problem to explain to the families of the victims why the compensation amount is different for everyone, especially when everyone is going through the same thing at the last moment before the accident. .

After the China Eastern Airlines MU5735 crash, the 400,000 yuan ($62,900) limit became a focus. However, many Chinese media pointed out that, taking the 2010 Yichun air disaster in Heilongjiang as an example, the compensation amount of the airline company was actually higher than the legal limit, and it was the highest amount of compensation for an air accident in China’s civil aviation industry so far.

The official Xinhua News Agency reported at the time that the Henan Airlines involved “considered the cumulative increase in the per capita disposable income of urban residents across the country since 2006” and increased the amount of compensation, plus living allowances and consolation funds for the families of the deceased passengers. The total compensation standard for passengers is RMB 960,000.

When the Chinese media talked about the “400,000 yuan” limit, on the one hand, they emphasized the voice of the people to increase the amount, and on the other hand, they also emphasized that the “Regulations on the Limit of Liability for Domestic Air Transport Carriers” had adjusted the limit of compensation several times. In fact, so does the Montreal Convention.

In the most recent revision on December 28, 2019, the Montreal Convention set the limit for passenger death or injury compensation to 128,821 International Monetary Fund Special Drawing Rights (IMF SDR) units ($178,200; $1,131,900) RMB), which is 2.83 times the liability limit for domestic flights in China.

Lawyer James Healy-Platt wrote on his law firm’s website in November last year with another partner that U.S. courts have awarded the world‘s highest average damages for air crash victims, at $5.2 million. “This is based on a number of factors, including ease of access to justice, juries, and a culture that recognizes unlimited compensation for the emotional pain of bereavement.”

The article also listed data and pointed out that Asian countries awarded the lowest amount of damages, about US$500,000; the UK was slightly higher than the EU, but neither was higher than US$2 million. Healy-Platt told the BBC’s Chinese correspondent that among Asian countries, Singapore and Japan’s compensation levels were “generous” than China’s.

“China Philanthropist” magazine under China News Weekly quoted lawyer Zhang Qihuai, a researcher at the Aviation and Space Law Research Center of China University of Political Science and Law who once represented some MH370 family members, said: “The compensation limit of 400,000 yuan has not been raised or abolished so far, but Air crash accidents are no longer implemented in accordance with this standard. If this standard is implemented, it is not as good as compensation for a ground traffic accident.”

Zhang Qihuai claimed that the limit of liability for passengers’ compensation should be raised to at least 1 million yuan.

“China Philanthropist” magazine also pointed out that aviation accident insurance is the main way for the families of air crash victims and injured passengers to obtain compensation. Lawyer Zhang Qihuai said: “With the improvement of people’s awareness of insurance, they will generally buy a piece of aviation accident insurance. Some units will also take the initiative to purchase aviation accident insurance when they book tickets for their employees.”

In Taiwan and Hong Kong, aviation accident coverage is generally used as part of travel insurance (travel insurance). As long as it is proved that the insured is taking an approved passenger aircraft as a passenger, the accident will be covered by accident during the flight. Healy-Platt pointed out to the BBC Chinese that this type of insurance generally does not pay much in the event of a fatal accident, and is more useful to deal with expenses such as treatment for serious injuries and repatriation by special medical planes.

The China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission announced on March 30 that in terms of personal insurance, relevant insurance companies have actively carried out insurance claims according to customer reports. At present, 11 companies have paid 14 indemnities to the families of the victims, with a total amount of 14.85 million yuan.

But in any case, this is the passenger’s own insurance to protect themselves, not the airline’s liability compensation.

The official China News Agency quoted Wang Xujin, director of the Insurance Research Center of Beijing Technology and Business University, as saying that if it is an insurance liability, the indemnity obligation should be fulfilled within ten days after reaching a compensation agreement with the insured or beneficiary. But that means when an agreement is reached becomes a prerequisite.

The existence of compulsory compensation does not mean that the families of the victims cannot seek higher compensation, but it generally means that the families have to resort to court proceedings, which involves complex issues of attribution. In addition to airlines, the claimants will also include aircraft. Manufacturers, so that one of the components of the aircraft, such as the manufacturer of the engine. Several Chinese media pointed out that the 2004 China Eastern Airlines Baotou air crash and the 2014 disappearance of Malaysia Airlines MH370 are still pending.

According to HG.org, a 25-year-old American legal information website, claims made by survivors of air accidents or families of victims through lawsuits are generally divided into two categories: pecuniary damages and non-pecuniary damages. This includes medical expenses, loss of income, etc. The latter includes injuries such as mental distress.

According to the website, the amount of non-pecuniary damages is usually larger.

Since the day of the incident, Chinese netizens have continued to call on China Eastern Airlines and the families of the victims of MU5735 to hold the aircraft manufacturer Boeing Co. to be held accountable. But the results of the investigation may have a great impact on Boeing.” But the British lawyer Healy-Platt told the BBC Chinese that he thought it was “too early” to talk about suing Boeing for claims.

After the death of China Eastern Airlines flight MU5735, airlines, civil aviation regulators, and even Chinese and foreign aviation commentators were busy clarifying that the model of the crashed plane was a Boeing 737-800 series, not the 737 Max series, which was identified as having design flaws. But the two air crashes related to the Boeing 737 Max are undoubtedly one of the most talked about air crash compensation cases in recent years.

After the JT610 air crash, Indonesia’s state-run public transport accident insurance company (PT Jasa Raharja) paid 50 million rupiah (US$3,487; 22,100 yuan) to each passenger killed in accordance with the law. British insurer Global Aerospace, which represents Lion Air and Boeing, also offered about $92,000 per deceased.

However, in July 2019, an investigation by the BBC’s current affairs program “Panorama” revealed that Global Aerospace allegedly tricked the families of the Lion Air victims into signing a disclaimer, giving up judicial pursuit of Boeing in exchange for the $92,000. Global Aerospace has denied the allegations to the BBC but declined to elaborate, citing confidentiality; Boeing declined to comment on the allegations.

In November 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois approved the agreement between Boeing and the families of the victims of flight ET302, and Boeing took full responsibility for the crash. The exact amount of compensation has not yet been finalized, but before that, Boeing and the U.S. Department of Justice reached an out-of-court settlement on related criminal lawsuits, with a fine of $2.5 billion, of which about $500 million will be allocated to the two Boeing 737 Max air crashes totaling 346 people killed family members of passengers.

Another more recent major air crash compensation case occurred on January 8, 2020, when Ukraine International Airlines flight PS752 crashed shortly after takeoff from Tehran, Iran, killing 176 people. Authorities in Tehran later admitted that Iran’s Revolutionary Guards had made a “catastrophic mistake” by shooting down the airliner with missiles, treating it as an enemy plane. In December of the same year, the Iranian government announced that it would distribute $150,000 to each victim.

Those killed on flight PS752 included 82 Iranians, 63 Canadians, 11 Ukrainians, four Afghans, four Britons and three Germans. Some are actually also permanent foreign residents of Canada.

As a result, the families of the six Canadian victims further filed a claim in the local court. In January 2022, the Ontario Superior Court, in the absence of Iranian representatives, ruled that the Iranian government must pay a total of C$107 million (US$85.96 million; 546 million yuan) plus interest to the estates of the six victims. Before the verdict, the Iranian government claimed that the Canadian court had no jurisdiction to hear the case, and criticized the Canadian side for its “shameful” behavior.

After the accident of China Eastern Airlines MU5735, the Malaysia Airlines MH370 family platform certification Weibo post said: “Every air accident is lonely, and no air accident is for reference. It is necessary to rely on professionals to investigate the entire incident responsibly. , and a fact to the family.”