Morris v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, King v. Bristow Helicopters Ltd.

2 A.C. 628 (2002)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Morris v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, King v. Bristow Helicopters Ltd.

United Kingdom House of Lords
2 A.C. 628 (2002)

  • Written by Elizabeth Yingling, JD

Facts

In Morris v. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, Morris (plaintiff), a minor traveling alone on a KLM flight, awoke to find a passenger inappropriately touching Morris’s leg. Morris immediately advised a flight attendant, who moved Morris to a different seat. Morris was subsequently diagnosed with clinical depression and sued KLM, asserting injury under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention. The England and Wales Court of Appeal held that mental illness was not a “bodily injury” under Article 17. In support, the court noted that decades passed after the Warsaw Convention was enacted in 1929 before any claims for mental illness were filed against carriers under Article 17. Morris appealed. In King v. Bristow Helicopters Ltd., King (plaintiff) was a passenger in a helicopter that become engulfed in smoke upon landing. King disembarked the aircraft and was not physically injured. He was subsequently diagnosed with a peptic ulcer. The Scottish First Division allowed the claim under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention. The United States Supreme Court, in Eastern Airlines Inc. v. Floyd, had held that Article 17 only applied when an air passenger suffered death, physical injury, or “physical manifestation of injury.” Subsequent to Floyd, the United States District Court for the District of Montana issued Weaver v. Delta Airlines Inc. and held that post-traumatic-stress disorder that resulted in brain trauma was a bodily injury under Article 17. Morris and Bristow Helicopters appealed their respective claims, and the appeals were consolidated.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Steyn, J.)

Concurrence (Hope, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Mackay, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Nicholls, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Hobhouse, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 816,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership