Five Australian Women Granted Right to Sue Qatar Airways Over Invasive Searches
Court Upholds Appeal, Allowing Lawsuit Against Airline and Airport Operator
In a significant legal victory for five Australian women who were subjected to invasive searches at Doha's Hamad International Airport in 2020, the Federal Court of Australia has ruled that they can proceed with their lawsuit against Qatar Airways.
The incident, which involved the women being strip-searched and examined for signs of recent childbirth after an abandoned baby was found in a bin at the airport, sparked international condemnation and outrage.
The court's decision to uphold the women's appeal means that the case can now move forward to trial, potentially paving the way for compensation for the harm they suffered.The initial attempt by the women to hold Qatar Airways accountable under the Montreal Convention, a multilateral treaty governing airline liability in cases of death or injury to passengers, was rejected by Justice John Halley.
He argued that the airline could not be held responsible as its staff lacked the authority to influence the actions of Qatari police and nurses who conducted the examinations on the tarmac.
However, the full bench of the Federal Court, comprising Justices Angus Stewart, Debra Mortimer, and James Stellios, found errors in the primary judge's rulings and allowed parts of the case against Qatar Airways and Matar, the operator of Hamad International Airport, to proceed.The court's decision marks a crucial moment for the five women, who are seeking damages for unlawful physical contact and false imprisonment.
They claim that the invasive searches caused them significant mental health trauma, including depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.
While passengers from the UK and New Zealand who were also subjected to invasive searches have not joined this particular lawsuit, the case could set an important precedent for future legal actions against airlines and airport operators in similar circumstances.The women's legal team, led by Damian Sturzaker, expressed satisfaction with the court's ruling, emphasizing their clients' right to seek justice for their traumatic experiences.
The case is now expected to proceed to trial, where the details of the incident and the extent of the airline's and airport operator's responsibilities will be examined more thoroughly.This development adds to the ongoing scrutiny of Qatar Airways' practices in light of several high-profile incidents involving passenger mistreatment.
It also highlights the complex issues surrounding accountability for events that occur within the jurisdiction of foreign governments, particularly in countries with distinct legal frameworks like Qatar.
The incident, which involved the women being strip-searched and examined for signs of recent childbirth after an abandoned baby was found in a bin at the airport, sparked international condemnation and outrage.
The court's decision to uphold the women's appeal means that the case can now move forward to trial, potentially paving the way for compensation for the harm they suffered.The initial attempt by the women to hold Qatar Airways accountable under the Montreal Convention, a multilateral treaty governing airline liability in cases of death or injury to passengers, was rejected by Justice John Halley.
He argued that the airline could not be held responsible as its staff lacked the authority to influence the actions of Qatari police and nurses who conducted the examinations on the tarmac.
However, the full bench of the Federal Court, comprising Justices Angus Stewart, Debra Mortimer, and James Stellios, found errors in the primary judge's rulings and allowed parts of the case against Qatar Airways and Matar, the operator of Hamad International Airport, to proceed.The court's decision marks a crucial moment for the five women, who are seeking damages for unlawful physical contact and false imprisonment.
They claim that the invasive searches caused them significant mental health trauma, including depression and post-traumatic stress disorder.
While passengers from the UK and New Zealand who were also subjected to invasive searches have not joined this particular lawsuit, the case could set an important precedent for future legal actions against airlines and airport operators in similar circumstances.The women's legal team, led by Damian Sturzaker, expressed satisfaction with the court's ruling, emphasizing their clients' right to seek justice for their traumatic experiences.
The case is now expected to proceed to trial, where the details of the incident and the extent of the airline's and airport operator's responsibilities will be examined more thoroughly.This development adds to the ongoing scrutiny of Qatar Airways' practices in light of several high-profile incidents involving passenger mistreatment.
It also highlights the complex issues surrounding accountability for events that occur within the jurisdiction of foreign governments, particularly in countries with distinct legal frameworks like Qatar.
