Woman Who Spilled Hot Tea Loses Case Against Emirates, Ordered to Pay Legal Fees
Jackie Reddy December 02, 2015
An Australian woman who filed a lawsuit against Emirates over a spilled hot drink has been ordered to foot the cost of the airline’s legal fees.
An Australian woman who attempted to sue Emirates over spilled tea has not only lost her case, but has now been ordered to pay the carrier’s legal costs.
Michelle Leanne Dibbs, of Sydney, was on the first leg of a flight to Malta via Dubai in 2012 when the hot beverage slid from her tray table and spilled onto her leg. Dibbs claimed that the incident caused her to “jump up and twist sharply,” a movement which resulted in a severe back injury that required surgery upon her arrival in Malta.
Court documents state that, “After reaching Malta, the plaintiff underwent surgery for a disc protrusion in her lower back… She claims that the injury sustained on the flight has left her with an ongoing level of significant disability.”
Dibbs, a synchronized swimmer, filed a suit against the airline in the New South Wales Supreme Court shortly after the incident.
Following two hearings, the latest of which occurred on Tuesday, the court found against her claim.
While Emirates had offered Dibbs AUD 75,000 (USD $54,900) in compensation in October 2014, the offer was not agreed to and expired last month.
At the latest hearing earlier this week, the court also ordered Dibbs to cover Emirates’ legal fees that have been accrued “on an indemnity basis” from October 17, 2014.
The relevant court documents associated with Dibbs’ claim against the carrier can be found here.
[Photo: Emirates]
You’re Reading
oops, meant to say in the first line of my post, that **her failure to report any back injury during the flight**.... signified unreliable testimony, (in the opinion of the court.)
On the one hand, the court felt that her failure to report any injury during the flight. I don't see this as unusual in that back injuries can sometimes take awhile after the precipitating incident to make their presence known. On the other hand, from court testimony by the plaintiff, it would seem that there is a fair possibility that the plaintiff was not wearing her seat belt - something which of course, all airlines urge one to do whenever one is in the seat. Since her argument was that the injury occurred as the result of a sudden movement involving a partial standing movement - something pretty hard to do when wearing a seatbelt - the court seems to have held that the airline had already done all it could to prevent sudden, possibly injurious movements whilst in an airline seat - whether in response to turbulence, or in this case, to reflex action to a hot beverage. It was also noted in court that her travel insurance covered the cost of the surgery to her back, but that she did not seek treatment for scalding burns. (The flight crew did give her first aid treatment for the scald.) The contentious issue was the back injury.
Should have taken the deal.
@payam81...Agreed!! Will the US legal system ever progress to this sanity?
Good! Wish US courts had as much common sense.