Court orders airline to pay passenger QR20,000 for refusing to let her board the flight
NT Bureau
DOHA: The Investment and Trade Court in Qatar has ordered an airline to pay a compensation of QR 20,000 to a passenger after an employee of the airline refused to allow her to board the plane.
The court ruled that the money must be paid as material and moral damages, with the ruling coming into force immediately.
According to Al Sharq, the facts of the case indicate that a female passenger filed a lawsuit against an airline company before the Investment and Trade Court, requesting that the company be obligated to pay an amount of 500,000 riyals in compensation in damages for refusing to allow her to board the plane.
On the day of the incident, the passenger went to the airport to complete the check-in procedures, and carried out all the necessary travel procedures in preparation for boarding the plane on a flight from Doha heading to an Arab capital.
When she arrived at the airline’s gate and handed over her papers to the employee, the employee addressed the passenger in a loud voice and claimed that she was late and would not be allowed to board the plane to go to her destination.
The passenger tried to convince the employee to allow her to board the plane, especially since there was sufficient time, which was about an hour before take-off, but the employee refused without justification and dealt with the passenger in an inappropriate manner, which led to her collapse and needed urgent medical care, and she ended up missing her flight.
She first filed a complaint with the airline company, but it did nothing, which led her to file a lawsuit before the Investment and Trade Court.
The court, after checking all the documents, and hearing both sides, ruled in favour of the passenger.
Lawyer Abdullah Noemi Al-Hajri, the legal representative for the plaintiff, requested a ruling to compensate the traveler for the losses and stress she suffered, based on Article 171 of the Civil Code.
he company did not pay its responsibility, which led to the court concluding that it was responsible for compensating the traveling plaintiff for the damages she sustained.
