Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Air Canada appealed a judgment ordering full reimbursement, including taxes and fees, for discriminatory seat charges imposed on passengers with disabilities.

• The class action originated from Air Canada's policy requiring certain disabled individuals to purchase a second seat on domestic flights.

• The Court had to interpret whether “cost of the seat” in earlier judgments included airport fees and passenger security charges.

• Air Canada argued that only the base airfare should be reimbursed since taxes and fees were remitted to third parties.

• The Court ruled that full reimbursement was required under the principle of full compensation for wrongful conduct.

• The appeal was dismissed with costs, affirming the lower court’s interpretation and reinforcing the obligation to restore claimants fully.

Facts of the case

In Air Canada v. P.A., 2025 QCCA 518, the Quebec Court of Appeal addressed a narrow but significant issue in a long-running class action involving systemic discrimination. The case arose from Air Canada’s historical policy requiring certain passengers with disabilities or obesity to pay for an additional seat on domestic flights, either because of their physical needs or the requirement for a support person. The class action, initiated in 2008, was certified in 2011, and resulted in a 2019 judgment finding Air Canada liable for discriminatory practices that violated public order and contractual obligations under Quebec civil law.

The trial judge in the original decision ruled that Air Canada’s policy constituted a contractual fault and ordered reimbursement of the illegally charged costs for the second seat. This decision was upheld on appeal in 2021 and leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was denied. As a result, the litigation moved into the individual compensation phase, where affected passengers could claim reimbursement for the charges they had incurred.

The issue on appeal

The present appeal, heard in 2025, focused on whether passengers were entitled to a full refund of the entire amount paid for the second seat — including not only the base airfare but also associated airport improvement fees and passenger security charges. Air Canada argued that those fees and taxes, being remitted to third-party entities (such as airports and government agencies), could not form part of the reimbursable damages and should be excluded from compensation.

The respondent, represented by P.A. as legal curator for N.A., countered that the judgment on the merits required full restitution of the “cost of the seat,” which must logically include all charges paid by the passengers — not just the airline’s share. The trial judge in 2024 agreed with this position, stating that had Air Canada not imposed the illegal charge, the claimants would not have paid any amount for a second seat, including the taxes and fees. Thus, full reimbursement was necessary to properly compensate the class members.

Court of Appeal’s decision

The Quebec Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed Air Canada’s appeal. Writing for the Court, Justice Yves-Marie Morissette confirmed that the original judgment intended to restore the claimants to the financial position they would have been in had no discrimination occurred. The Court rejected Air Canada’s restrictive interpretation of “seat cost,” affirming that this phrase included the total price paid, not just the base fare.

The Court also held that Air Canada could not force disabled passengers to launch separate lawsuits against tax authorities or airport operators to recover charges they paid as a result of the airline’s wrongful conduct. The appellate judges emphasized that civil liability in Quebec includes the principle of full compensation (réparation intégrale), and any distinction between base fare and fees would undermine that principle.

Finally, the Court ruled that the lower court’s interpretation was entirely consistent with the earlier class action judgment and did not modify it in any way. It was simply a proper application of its terms to the claims administration process.

Conclusion

The Quebec Court of Appeal rejected Air Canada’s attempt to exclude taxes and fees from its reimbursement obligation. The judgment reaffirms the principle of full compensation in civil liability and ensures that victims of discrimination in commercial contexts are restored to their rightful position. Air Canada was ordered to pay costs both for the appeal and in the original hearing, and the case now proceeds with the compensation process fully defined.