Originally Posted by
bedelman
I cite Thefreedictionary not as an authority I'd need to rely on in court, but to explain the principle of a unilateral contract to those who may be unfamiliar with it. A US lawyer and US court would be familiar already! One wouldn't need to cite a definition of unilateral contract. Perhaps some caselaw, but even that is superfluous.
It is true that a contract requires offer and acceptance. But the form of the offer and the form of the acceptance may not always be signed instruments that lay persons would recognize as "contracts." In a unilateral contract context, the offer is stated to the general public, often as general as an advertisement. Then acceptance is via an act (e.g. buying a product). Publishing a web page of policies and benefits can be a unilateral contract offer. Buying a business class ticket ($$$$) and arriving at a lounge is a proper acceptance of such an offer.
BA is subject to US DOT regulation and to breach of contract claims in US court. This is well established in myriad proceedings including multiple US DOT actions against BA for all manner of violations, as well as multiple consumer claims against BA in US courts. I could post some citations if you like.
I doubt the DOT would have rules in place relating to Lounge access or that there have been any cases that would have DOT rules apply to your situation.
Let's look at the contract issue. Your friend bought a business class ticket on Iberia, a carrier operating under it's own AOC and as a separate entity within IAG.
Your friend is also an EXP on AA, not related to BA at all. The only way that you could bring BA in to this would be to see if the JVA makes them a party to this case. Doubtful.
You want to rely on an offer that BA makes regarding lounge access that is pointed out on the BA website as well as the
oneworld website. Alright... let's say there is an offer there and there's a unilateral contract. On the very pages that this offer is made, the offer is stipulated that it is subject to capacity restrictions. Therefore; that stipulation would also form part of the contract under your argument that there is a contract. It's a point that cannot be neglected!
Secondly, you still haven't shown that any damages have arisen from this.
My argument is that there are no damages and even if there were, BA is not liable.