Vueling Airlines Ordered to Compensate Woman with Multiple Sclerosis
Case Overview
In a landmark decision, the First Instance Court No. 4 of Bergara has ruled in favor of a woman from Gipuzkoa suffering from multiple sclerosis (MS). The court condemned Vueling Airlines to pay her €1,500 plus interest for denying her the right to fly with her scooter, crucial for her mobility due to her condition.
The Incident
The case dates back to December 2021, when the plaintiff, diagnosed with multiple sclerosis, was traveling with her husband on a flight from Sevilla to Bilbao operated by Vueling Airlines. Prior to the flight, they informed Vueling about the specifics of her scooter through a representative from Viajes Eroski, with the airline confirming that she could bring it onboard.
Despite this prior approval, upon arrival at the airport, the flight commander refused to allow her to board with her scooter, leading to their removal by the Civil Guard. Consequently, the couple was forced to rent a car to travel from Sevilla to Bilbao and sought reimbursement for various costs, including rental fees and emotional distress.
Airline’s Defense
Vueling Airlines contested the claim, arguing that they had justifiably denied boarding due to the lithium battery in the scooter, which they claimed is prohibited for air travel. The airline suggested that the only eligible compensation would be for the flight not used and other related costs.
Court’s Ruling
The court sided with the plaintiff, stating that she had taken all necessary precautions to ensure travel with her scooter. The confirmation from the travel agency and the fact that the scooter had previously traveled without issue on the outbound flight bolstered her argument. The ruling highlighted the violation of her rights as a passenger under applicable regulations, which mandate immediate compensation in case of involuntary denial of boarding.
The court also pointed out that Vueling had failed to provide alternative travel arrangements or appropriate assistance to the couple, as required by regulations. It emphasized the lack of any demonstrated effort by the airline to support them.
Emotional and Moral Damages
While the court noted that the plaintiff did not provide specific evidence for her claim of emotional damages, it acknowledged that the incident’s nature was sufficient to infer distress. The court remarked that denying her boarding at the airplane’s door, particularly because of her mobility aid, undoubtedly harmed her dignity and self-esteem.
Conclusion
This ruling serves as a critical reminder of the rights of passengers, especially those with disabilities. It underscores the importance of proper communication between airlines and passengers regarding mobility aids, setting a precedent for future cases involving accessibility and air travel. Vueling’s failure to adhere to regulations not only resulted in financial repercussions but also highlighted deficiencies in supporting passengers with disabilities.