AVIATION – carriers’ liability – where applicants had boarded flight at Doha airport bound for Sydney – where aircraft had been waiting at gate for hours – where applicants allege that all women passengers were directed to leave the aircraft – where four applicants allege that they endured bodily inspections and three applicants allege invasive examinations by a “nurse” in an ambulance on airport tarmac – where applicants subsequently returned to aircraft which eventually departed Doha and reached Sydney – whether claim can be brought against carrier under Art 17 of the Montreal Convention – temporal scope of Art 17 – meaning of “in the course of any of the operations of embarking or disembarking”

AVIATION – scope of exclusivity principle in Art 29 of the Montreal Convention – whether, if accident not held to be “in the course of any of the operations of embarking or disembarking”, applicants are precluded from bringing common law claims in negligence against carrier – whether temporal scope of exclusivity principle is coextensive with Art 17 – whether “international carriage by air” is broader than Art 17

NEGLIGENCE – where applicants assert alternative case in negligence against carrier – where “second limb” of negligence case is that the carrier failed to take steps to protect the applicants from harm once directed off the aircraft – where primary judge held that “second limb” of negligence claim had no reasonable prospects of success – whether any basis on which duty of care could extend to the risk of harm independently of embarking or disembarking the aircraft – whether applicants have a more than fanciful prospect of being able to plead facts that disclose cause of action TORTS – where applicants assert claims in negligence, assault, false imprisonment and battery against airport

Dr Christopher Ward SC, Richard Reynolds and Stephanie Erian appeared for applicant.

Reasons for the judgment can be found here.