## Facts

- Michel Paradis, proceeding pro se, bought round-trip international tickets on Ghana Airways for himself and four companions, traveling from New York to Freetown, Sierra Leone, with connections in Accra, Ghana.
- The return flight from Freetown to New York was scheduled for June 18, 2004; the travelers confirmed their return reservations two days before departure.
- The group arrived at the Freetown airport for a 3:00 p.m. departure; after the scheduled departure time passed, an announcement stated the flight was canceled.
- Ghana Airways lacked a ticket desk at the airport; staff directed the group to contact the Freetown office the next business day.
- Due to time-sensitive obligations in the United States, Paradis arranged same-day substitute travel and later purchased more expensive onward tickets to return home.
- Paradis contacted Ghana Airways’ New York office seeking information and compensation; he alleged the agent offered only a partial refund and provided no assurance of prompt rebooking.
- Paradis sued for breach of contract under New York common law seeking damages tied to the cancellation and resulting substitute-travel costs.
- Ghana Airways removed the case to federal court and moved to dismiss, arguing the Montreal Convention preempted the state-law claim and that Paradis could not recover for companions’ losses.

## Issues

1. Whether the Montreal Convention (and Warsaw Convention principles) preempt a state-law breach-of-contract claim seeking damages arising from the cancellation/postponement of an international flight.
2. Whether the pleaded facts constitute “nonperformance” permitting state-law contract remedies, or “delay” governed exclusively by the treaty regime.
3. Whether the plaintiff may recover damages on behalf of his traveling companions.

## Decision

- The court granted Ghana Airways’ motion to dismiss.
- It held the Montreal Convention provides the exclusive cause of action and limits for claims within its substantive scope, including claims for delay in international carriage.
- It characterized Paradis’s complaint as seeking delay damages, notwithstanding the contract label and the purchase of substitute transportation.
- Because Paradis proceeded only on a state-law contract theory (and not under the treaty), the claim was dismissed as preempted.
- The court did not need to resolve the standing argument in light of dismissal on preemption grounds.

## Legal Principles

- For international carriage by air, the Montreal Convention (and related Warsaw Convention doctrine) supplies the exclusive framework for damages claims within its coverage.
- Treaty exclusivity applies to actions for damages “howsoever founded,” preventing plaintiffs from recasting covered delay claims as state common-law causes of action.
- A flight cancellation or postponement that amounts to late carriage—without a carrier’s total repudiation—falls within “delay” for treaty purposes, even if the passenger arranges alternative travel.
- When a claim is within the treaty’s scope, state-law remedies cannot supplement or circumvent the treaty’s conditions and liability limits.

## Conclusion

The court dismissed a New York breach-of-contract suit seeking damages from an international flight cancellation because the claim was substantively one for delay in international air carriage and therefore could be brought, if at all, only under the Montreal/Warsaw treaty framework.


Paradis v. Ghana Airways Ltd., 348 F. Supp. 2d 106 (S.D.N.Y. 2004)