Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Validity of the assignment of the Passengers’ claim for compensation under the Air Passenger Protection Regulations to the petitioner was contested.

• Standing of Air Passenger Rights to seek judicial review of the Civil Resolution Tribunal’s decision was a central issue.

• Jurisdiction of the Civil Resolution Tribunal to decide claims under the Passenger Regulation was questioned.

• Determination of whether compensation under the Passenger Regulation constitutes a debt enforceable at common law was pivotal.

• Interpretation of the federal statutory scheme governing air passenger compensation and its interaction with provincial tribunals was examined.

• The implications of bypassing the Canadian Transportation Agency’s complaint process were considered.

Facts of the case

In November 2022, Anne Boyd and Robert Boyd purchased WestJet tickets to travel from Kelowna, British Columbia, to Rome, Italy, on May 18, 2023. Their itinerary included a flight from Kelowna to Calgary, followed by a connecting flight from Calgary to Rome. In May 2023, WestJet pilots, represented by the Air Line Pilots Association, were negotiating a new collective agreement and issued a strike notice on May 15, 2023. WestJet responded with a lockout notice. Under federal law, a legal strike or lockout could begin as of 3:00 am MDT on May 19, 2023. The Boyds took their flight from Kelowna to Calgary on May 18, 2023, but their flight to Rome was cancelled due to the ongoing labour disruption. They were notified of the cancellation by email on the morning of May 18, 2023. The Boyds were rescheduled on flights operated by other airlines and arrived in Rome on May 20, 2023, more than 24 hours later than originally scheduled. On May 19, 2023, at about 1:00 am ET, the pilots and WestJet reached a tentative agreement, avoiding the strike and lockout.

The Boyds made a complaint to WestJet under the Air Passenger Protection Regulations (Passenger Regulation) for compensation and reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses arising from the delay. WestJet responded that the disruption was caused by a labour dispute and therefore out of its control, so no compensation was owing.

The tribunal decision and subsequent assignment

The Boyds filed a claim with the Civil Resolution Tribunal on July 4, 2023, seeking $2,227.25 in total: $185.25 for a hotel in Calgary, $92.00 for meals, and $2,000 for standardized compensation for delay under section 19(1) of the Passenger Regulation. The Tribunal determined that a 72-hour strike notice qualified as a labour disruption and dismissed the claim for $2,000 standardized compensation. The Tribunal granted reimbursement for hotel and meal costs ($277.25), $15.78 in pre-judgment interest, and $62.50 in Tribunal fees.

On July 24, 2024, the Boyds assigned their claims against WestJet to Air Passenger Rights, a non-profit organization advocating for air passenger rights. On July 29, 2024, Air Passenger Rights filed a petition for judicial review, seeking to set aside the dismissal of the $2,000 claim and to have the compensation awarded to it, or alternatively, to remit the claim back to the Tribunal.

Legal framework and policy terms at issue

The case focused on the interpretation of the Air Passenger Protection Regulations, specifically the provisions regarding compensation for flight delays and cancellations, and the definition of “labour disruption” as a circumstance outside the carrier’s control under section 10(1)(j). The court examined the regulatory scheme under the Canada Transportation Act, which mandates the Canadian Transportation Agency to regulate air travel and enforce passenger rights. The petitioner argued that the compensation was a contractual debt incorporated into the carrier’s tariff, while WestJet and the Tribunal argued it was a statutory entitlement.

Jurisdictional and standing issues

A central issue was whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to decide claims under the Passenger Regulation and whether Air Passenger Rights, as assignee, had standing to seek judicial review. The court found that compensation under the Passenger Regulation is not a debt enforceable at common law, but a statutory entitlement. The assignment to Air Passenger Rights was found invalid, and the petitioner did not have standing to seek judicial review. The court also concluded that the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to decide the Passengers’ claim.

Ruling and outcome

The Supreme Court of British Columbia concluded that compensation for delayed or cancelled flights under the Canada Transportation Act and Passenger Regulation is not a debt enforceable at common law. The assignment between the Boyds and Air Passenger Rights was invalid and unenforceable. Air Passenger Rights did not have standing to bring the petition, and the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to decide the claim. The petition was dismissed in favor of WestJet Airlines Ltd. No new damages or costs were awarded by the court in this decision, and the total monetary award in favor of the successful party, WestJet, cannot be determined from the judgment.