Originally Posted by
LHR/MEL/Europe FF
But there is no 'international' transportation law here.
There are three important part which are governed by international law here. First, any ticket of this nature is government by international law to which the two party countries (origin and destination) have mutually agreed to. The statutory aspects of these laws are automatically written into the contract. The interpretation of these aspects however depend on the local jurisdiction (and accordingly the later versions attempt to add clauses to fix misinterpretation).
Second, it has to do with which parties are liable for the breach. The original post claimed the issuing airline has zero liability, however this is not true. They are jointly liable so compensation can be sought from either party. These contracts are governed by normally the Montreal act, otherwise Warsaw.
Third, the post ignored the separation between a voluntary and involuntary downgrade. The compensation for breach of contract is again a matter of international law applied at the local jurisdiction.
Originally Posted by
LHR/MEL/Europe FF
Consider the position of passengers downgraded on paid tickets. Most airlines will assess the premium cabin fare paid against a full (or nearly full) coach fare, and refund that difference alone. in some cases, for example domestic USA travel, the coach fare may be more expensive than the premium cabin fare, and the passenger gets nothing. Not entirely fair, but that's how it works for the moment.
The tickets would have to be the most cost mitigated of similar conditions at the time of purchase. Using the fare of a full Y class ticket would not be valid since must premium class tickets are not similar in nature. If they were to insist on using a full Y class ticket as the base line, then counter it by using a full F class ticket as the comparison. They will very quickly abandon that idea.
I am not arguing that the compensation by TG was invalid, as it does seem to be in the correct area, and the passenger has already accepted the resolution. However it does seem this resolution was not fully complied with and there could be some issue there (however small). I am simply pointing out the issues with that post before these ideas propagate.