guoguo914

I used FB miles to book a China Eastern flight. The handle is broken and China Eastern is refusing to reimburse saying the ticket was ticketed by Air France (057). Went over to Air France counter and the lady said it should be China Eastern who's liable... Had to rush out of the airport to go to an appointment so did not spend time arguing.

So who really should be responsible?

irishguy28

The carrier that caused the damage.

If only China Eastern-operated flights were on your ticket, then there can be no doubt about which operator is responsible for the damage.

ahopkins767

Last year I travelled with my wife on a 3 leg KLM award ticket, first leg KLM last 2 legs China Airlines.

One car seat was lost. China Airlines paid out and took responsibility, even though they seemed to have proof it never arrived at AMS to be put onto their plane.

The final carrier is responsible.

Thus, China Eastern should pay.

Ditto

It's always the responsibility of the operating carrier of your *last* flight, it's irrelevant how you booked the ticket

Fabo.sk

According to IATA rules, operating carrier of last flight handles all the inquiries.

breton1fr

Wrong. The Airline which sold you the ticket is accountable.

NickB

That assertion is based on what?

Liability for damage or loss to baggage is governed by the Montreal Convention. If the contracting carrier is different from the actual carrier, there are potentially two sets of provisions of the Montreal Convention applicable.
In case of carriage by successive carriers, Article 36 of the Montreal Convention applies, under which the passenger has a right of action against the last carrier, the first carrier or the carrier which performed the carriage during which the baggage was damaged or lost. The carriers are jointly and severally liable, which means that the passenger can sue any of them for the whole of his loss.

If there are no successive carriers, then Article 40 and 45 apply, under which the passenger has the choice of suing either the actual carrier or the contracting carrier.

Those provisions are not entirely without ambiguity. In particular, meaning of "contracting carrier" is not altogether clear, with some cases suggesting that the notion of contracting carrier primarily concerns codeshare and franchise agreements (thereby seemingly equating contracting carrier to marketing carrier rather than ticketing carrier).

Either way, it is clear that under any interpretation of the Convention, China Eastern would definitely be liable to the OP and it may also be, depending on how "contracting carrier" is interpreted, that AF, as ticketing carrier might conceivably be jointly liable.