Happy Dude
Established Member
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2006
- Posts
- 2,945
What a world. A successful outcome for the OP will form precedent in similar future lawsuits brought by tiktokers because the hostie looked at them sideways or weren't pretty enough.
I am struggling to think of a cause of action here.Fascinating on so many levels.
Will be following thread and awaiting OP reporting outcome.
A claim for some points compo for lack of cleanness which could be supported by the Cabin crew would not be unreasonableI am struggling to think of a cause of action here.
Montreal Convention doesn’t apply. EU261 doesn’t apply. Contract law doesn’t apply. Australian consumer law doesn’t apply.
There is a contract around the purchasing of the fare. That could be refundable provided the OP had an applicable fare. And save for any complicating factors.
Sure. But the OP says they are going to bring a claim to recover their expenses.A claim for some points compo for lack of cleanness which could be supported by the Cabin crew would not be unreasonable
Only a civil suit I guess. And I like to see the expression on the judge’s face when he reads it.I can’t think of a possible avenue for them to do that?
Well yes, a civil suit. But you need a cause of action. You need to claim there has been a breach of ‘something’.Only a civil suit I guess. And I like to see the expression on the judge’s face when he reads it.
I guess taking chances with a civil suit might be better as it's a balance of probabilities rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.Well yes, a civil suit. But you need a cause of action. You need to claim there has been a breach of ‘something’.
Sure. But you can’t just bring a civil suit without a cause of action. You have to be claiming ‘something’.I guess taking chances with a civil suit might be better as it's a balance of probabilities rather than beyond a reasonable doubt.
Once again, if Lufthansa doesn't send anyone to court, they can't veritably defend or expect a ruling in their favour, no matter how outrageous the original claim of breach may seem. The fact that Lufthansa has any presence here is quite interesting (maybe I shouldn't be so naive), but it would also be the basis for claiming damages (i.e. without a presence here, who would you go after to pay the money or seize property if it came to it).
OP seems to go direct to the Australian Lufthansa GM who settles out of court. That avenue just raises more questions of course.Sure. But the OP says they are going to bring a claim to recover their expenses.
I can’t think of a possible avenue for them to do that?
Sorry, lost me there againOn the aircraft, I was only told, I could move to another seat, but i didn't know exactly how may there were, other than those i could see within my particular cabin. Of course I knew there was another cabin behind and the upper deck, but i couldn't see those from where I was, and I certainly would NOT have ever entertained a middle seat in the 2-3-2 rear cabin.
Im not asking you to convince me. I already have a reasonable picture.Thats the beauty of the situation. I dont need to convince you of anything.
Invested? No. I think the better word is amused and reason Im here is because this thread exists. Obviously you want people to hear your side??.Im a little confused why you're so "invested" given it wasn't your flight or your money.
Sounds like post #1All you do is sit here, coughing and moaning about "blah blah blah"
AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements
Sounds like post #1
Ah, thanks. A review of posts does indeed show that its not the OP's 'first rodeo'. Oh, well, it was i