PS752: When the Airline Has to Pay but the State at Fault Does Not
The Ontario Court of Appeal has upheld a ruling that Ukrainian airline UIA must pay full compensation to the families of the victims of flight PS752, which was shot down by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in January 2020. The tragedy claimed the lives of 176 passengers and crew members, including 11 Ukrainians. The Canadian court found the carrier negligent for failing to properly assess the risks of flying out of Tehran amid a period of military escalation. By finding UIA negligent, the Canadian court lifted the $180,000 per passenger cap set by the Montreal Convention. This means compensation could be significantly higher than the standard international payouts.
This ruling does not address Iran's international legal responsibility. However, it sends a troubling signal: the primary burden of compensation is shifted onto airlines, while the state directly responsible for the disaster continues to evade accountability.
Why Iran Should Bear Responsibility
On the day of the disaster, Iran did not close its airspace. Like other carriers flying that morning, UIA had received no official notices (NOTAMs) or warnings from Iran or any other reliable sources about threats to civilian aviation. Without such information, no airline can objectively assess the danger of a flight. The state controlling the airspace has the obligation to promptly inform about risks and to close the skies in case of military danger.
Moreover, nine other flights operated by various carriers departed from Imam Khomeini Airport on similar routes that morning – at least seven of them after the military escalation had already begun. This shows that UIA's decision to fly was neither unique nor reckless.
Nevertheless, Iran continues to avoid punishment: it is challenging the decision of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which pointed to its responsibility for violating aviation safety, and has even filed a case with the International Court of Justice against Ukraine, Canada, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
Justice Tools Left Unused
When I headed the team of prosecutors investigating this case, we repeatedly sent requests for legal assistance to the Canadian side. These were consistently ignored – just as our requests to Iran were. In essence, there was no genuine international cooperation, which I found deeply surprising.
We proposed that Canada – then a party to the Rome Statute (unlike Ukraine) – bring the case to the International Criminal Court. Article 14 of the Statute allows any State Party to refer a situation to the ICC Prosecutor. I remain convinced that the downing of the aircraft bears the hallmarks of a war crime, given the Iran – U.S. conflict and Iran's attack on U.S. positions in Iraq shortly before the tragedy.
Today, Ukraine could initiate such a referral as well, but this would require reclassifying the case and investigating it specifically as a war crime. There is more than enough material for this.
A Dangerous Precedent
We now have a precedent in which civil courts shift responsibility for international tragedies onto carriers. From a legal standpoint, this is simpler – but does it truly serve justice?
States that shoot down civilian aircraft continue to evade international punishment. This is not justice – it is an imitation of it.
Блог автора – матеріал, який відображає винятково точку зору автора. Текст блогу не претендує на об'єктивність та всебічність висвітлення теми, яка у ньому піднімається. Редакція "Української правди" не відповідає за достовірність та тлумачення наведеної інформації і виконує винятково роль носія. Точка зору редакції УП може не збігатися з точкою зору автора блогу.
