The Federal High Court in Lagos has ordered Dana Airlines Limited to pay a passenger N5.5 million in damages and legal costs over an 11-hour delay of a domestic flight, holding that the airline failed to justify the prolonged disruption.
In a judgement delivered on 25 May, Justice Yellim Bogoro ruled that Dana Air breached its contract of carriage by failing to transport Babajide Idowu as scheduled from Abuja to Lagos on Flight 9J-356 on 5 July 2018.
A certified true copy of the judgement obtained by PREMIUM TIMES on Friday showed that the court awarded Mr Idowu N5 million in general damages and N500,000 as solicitor’s fees.
Mr Idowu filed the suit in November 2019 through his lawyer, Lekan Ikuomola of Ayodeji Babajide and Lekan Partners.
| | |
|---|
He argued that Dana Air repeatedly postponed the flight and left him stranded at the Abuja airport for about 11 hours without explaining the reason for the delay.
He told the court that about 70 passengers were affected.
The claimant asked the court to declare that the airline breached its contract of carriage and sought compensation under Section 48(2) of the Civil Aviation Act, 2006, which incorporates the Montreal Convention into Nigerian law.
He also sought damages for psychological trauma, solicitor’s fees and litigation costs.
During the trial, Mr Idowu testified that although he eventually arrived in Lagos at about 11:10 p.m., neither the airline nor its officials gave passengers any reason for the repeated postponements.
According to him, it was only months later, after his lawyer exchanged correspondence with Dana Air, that he learnt the airline attributed the delay to regulatory safety checks.
Dana Air denied liability and filed a counterclaim.
Its Legal Officer, Chigozie Igbonugo, told the court that the delay resulted from safety advice issued by the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA).
He said passengers were informed through email notifications and airport announcements, adding that the airline’s conditions of carriage did not guarantee exact departure times.
Court’s findings
According to the documents, Mr Bogoro said there was no dispute that the flight was delayed.
“The defendant never denied that there was delay but has tried justifying the delay within the ambit of the permissible protocols for delay,” the judge declared.
The judge noted that once an airline accepts a passenger’s ticket, it assumes a contractual obligation to transport the passenger as agreed.
He was, however, not persuaded by Dana Air’s explanation for the disruption.
Although the airline maintained that the delay resulted from NCAA safety directives, Mr Bogoro found that it failed to produce any documentary evidence to support that claim or show that it had taken reasonable steps to avoid the delay.
“I have not found where the reason for the delay was communicated to the plaintiff,” the judge held, adding that the burden rested on the airline to prove its defence.
Relying on Section 48(2) of the Civil Aviation Act and the Montreal Convention, the court held that airlines are liable for damage caused by delays unless they can show they took all necessary measures to prevent the damage or that it was impossible to do so.
Mr Bogoro concluded that Dana Air failed to discharge that burden and declared that the airline breached its contract of carriage with Mr Idowu.
The court also accepted Mr Idowu’s claim that the prolonged delay caused him psychological trauma and awarded damages accordingly.
Counterclaim dismissed
The court also dismissed Dana Air’s counterclaim, in which the airline sought a declaration that it did not breach the Civil Aviation Act, the Nigerian Civil Aviation Regulations or the Montreal Convention.
Dana Air had asked the court to award it N10 million in general damages, arguing that the suit and media reports about it tarnished its reputation, reduced patronage and caused financial losses.
Mr Bogoro rejected those claims, holding that the airline failed to establish that Mr Idowu instigated the media reports or that the publications resulted in any measurable financial loss.
“There is no evidence led by the counterclaimant showing the defendant in counterclaim either instigated or initiated the media report,” the judge said.
He added that court proceedings are public and can be reported by journalists without the involvement of the parties to the case.
The judge also found that Dana Air failed to produce evidence linking the publications it relied on to any decline in patronage or financial hardship. He consequently dismissed the counterclaim in its entirety.
How the dispute began
According to court documents, Mr Idowu booked Flight 9J-356 from Abuja to Lagos, scheduled to depart at 12:33 p.m. on 5 July 2018.
Days before the trip, Dana Air began notifying him of changes to the departure time. The flight was first moved to 2:04 p.m. before being postponed several more times.
Mr Idowu told the court that throughout the day he repeatedly approached the airline’s sales and boarding desks to find out why the flight had been delayed. He said airline officials appealed for patience but did not explain what caused the disruption.
After arriving in Lagos, he sought compensation from the airline. When those efforts failed, he petitioned the then Consumer Protection Council, now the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC).
The dispute remained unresolved, prompting him to file the suit in November 2019.
The ruling adds to a growing body of Nigerian court decisions affirming passengers’ rights in disputes arising from delayed and cancelled flights.
Under the Civil Aviation Act, which incorporates the Montreal Convention into Nigerian law, airlines may be held liable for damage caused by delays unless they can demonstrate that they took all reasonable measures to prevent the disruption or that such measures were impossible.
The Nigerian Civil Aviation Regulations also require airlines to keep passengers informed during delays and provide appropriate care, including refreshments and communication, depending on the length and circumstances of the disruption.