## Facts

- Multiple lawsuits arising from the October 31, 2000 crash of Singapore Airlines Flight SQ 006 during takeoff in Taipei, Taiwan were coordinated in multidistrict litigation in the Central District of California.
- Singapore Airlines, Inc. (Singapore Air) operated the flight involved in the accident; passengers were killed and injured.
- United Airlines, Inc. (United) and Singapore Air were both members of the Star Alliance, a network intended to coordinate customer-facing services for multi-airline travel.
- The Star Alliance agreement stated that members were not general partners and remained legally separate entities.
- Plaintiffs Helen Broadfoot and Jay Spack were passengers traveling on a Star Alliance itinerary that included the Singapore Air-operated segment scheduled to fly to Los Angeles.
- Broadfoot and Spack purchased their tickets outside the United States, and the overall itinerary’s ultimate destination (as ticketed) was Australia.
- Under Article 28 of the Warsaw Convention, a U.S. court would have jurisdiction over their Convention claims only if one of the Convention’s specified fora applied, including the carrier’s domicile or principal place of business being in the United States.
- Singapore Air was neither domiciled nor headquartered in the United States.
- Broadfoot and Spack sued United in federal court under the Warsaw Convention, arguing that any Star Alliance member could be treated as the “carrier” for a Star Alliance flight, which would place the case within U.S. jurisdiction because United is U.S.-domiciled.
- United moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, arguing it was not the “carrier” of the crashed flight.

## Issues

1. For Warsaw Convention Article 28 jurisdiction, can a non-operating airline be treated as the “carrier” for an accident flight based solely on its membership in the same airline network (Star Alliance) as the operating airline?
2. If the operating airline is not U.S.-domiciled and the ticket was purchased outside the United States with an ultimate destination outside the United States, can plaintiffs establish U.S. jurisdiction by suing a U.S.-domiciled alliance member instead of the operating airline?

## Decision

- The court granted United’s motion to dismiss the Warsaw Convention claims against it for lack of jurisdiction.
- The court held that United was not the “carrier” of the flight that crashed within the meaning of the Warsaw Convention based only on Star Alliance membership and related customer-service coordination.
- Because United was not the relevant Convention carrier, the Warsaw Convention’s Article 28 jurisdictional fora did not provide a U.S. forum for these plaintiffs on these claims.

## Legal Principles

- The Warsaw Convention provides the governing cause of action for covered international air-transport injury claims and also restricts where such claims may be brought.
- Article 28’s four jurisdictional options are limited to: (1) the carrier’s domicile, (2) the carrier’s principal place of business, (3) the place of business through which the contract was made, or (4) the place of destination.
- “Carrier” status for Convention jurisdiction turns on which airline undertook the transportation for the segment at issue; it is not created by customer-service coordination or network branding.
- Contract language stating that alliance members remain separate legal entities and are not partners weighs against treating one member as legally responsible as a Convention carrier for another member’s operated flight.
- Plaintiffs cannot create Article 28 jurisdiction by labeling a marketing or network participant as the “carrier” when that entity did not operate the flight involved in the accident.

## Conclusion

The court dismissed Broadfoot and Spack’s Warsaw Convention claims against United because United’s Star Alliance relationship with Singapore Air did not make United a Convention “carrier” for the Singapore Air-operated flight that crashed in Taipei, and without a qualifying Article 28 forum tied to the actual carrier and ticketed itinerary, a U.S. court lacked Convention jurisdiction over United.


In re Air Crash at Taipei, Taiwan, on October 31, 2000, 2002 WL 32155476 (2002)