Destination ADR: charting a new course for airline passenger disputes

• Pages: 473-498
• Date: 01 April 2024
• Published date: 01 April 2024
• Author: Cheng-chi (Kirin) Chang

NOTES

DESTINATION ADR: CHARTING A NEW COURSE FOR

AIRLINE PASSENGER DISPUTES

†

This note has been recognized with an award, and a version of it has been published by the

American Journal of Mediation.

CHENG-CHI (KIRIN) CHANG*

Associate Director & Research Fellow of the AI and the Future of Work Program, Emory

University School of Law; J.D., University of Florida Levin College of Law; LL.M., University of

Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law; LL.B., National Chung Hsing University School of Law

in Taiwan. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Professors Donna Erez-Navot and

Christopher D. Hampson for their invaluable guidance and support in the preparation of this

article. I am also thankful for the insightful feedback provided by Rachel Cohen, Youyang Zhong,

Yilin (Jenny) Lu, Nanfeng Li, Edison Li, Shijie Xu, Yenpo Tseng, Jeffrey Chang, Chun-Ting Cho,

Zih-Ting You, Arron Fang, and Ai-Jing Wu, which enriched the content of this paper.

Additionally, my appreciation extends to all participants of the Alternative Dispute Resolution

Seminar, whose diverse perspectives and rigorous discussions have signif‌icantly contributed to

the depth and breadth of this research. I would like to further extend my appreciation to the

editors of the Georgetown Journal of International Law for their assistance in bringing this Note to

publication. Any errors or omissions are my sole responsibility. V

C 2024, Cheng-chi (Kirin) Chang

｜ 張正麒.

ABSTRACT

Airline passenger rights in the United States lag behind protections in the

European Union (EU), leaving consumers vulnerable. Since the 1978 Airline

Deregulation Act (ADA), limited federal oversight and reliance on airline con-

tracts have weakened recourse for passengers facing issues like disruptions, mis-

handled baggage, and unfair practices. The complex regulatory landscape and

high costs of litigation pose barriers to dispute resolution, exemplif‌ied by failed

attempts at a Passenger Bill of Rights (PBOR). In contrast, the EU has expanded

protections through legislation and dedicated alternative dispute resolution

(ADR) systems, including Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) platforms.

This Note analyzes the EU framework, using Spain as a case study, where

recent regulations strengthened ADR by binding authority to resolutions. This

analysis extends to pertinent observations from the German legal landscape.

Insights from the EU model highlight the potential for specialized aviation ADR

bodies and mandatory airline participation to level the playing f‌ield for passen-

gers. However, imposing similar reforms in the United States may conf‌lict with the

hands-off approach rooted in deregulation policies. More modest yet impactful

changes emphasizing incentives over mandates could promote voluntary airline

adoption of binding arbitration procedures approved by the Department of

†

*

473

Transportation (DOT). Targeted legislative adjustments maintaining deregulation

principles while expanding accessible dispute resolution would align with the EU’s

emphasis on passenger rights. Though substantial gaps remain, enhancing ADR

access can gradually improve protections consistent with the U.S. regulatory philos-

ophy. This incremental approach represents an attainable progression toward more

equitable aviation dispute resolution.

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 475

II. CHALLENGES OF U.S. AVIATION PASSENGER DISPUTE

RESOLUTION MECHANISMS .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476

A. Overview of Aviation Passenger Disputes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476

1. Parties Involved in Aviation Passenger Disputes . . 476

2. Types and Characteristics of Aviation Passenger

Disputes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477

B. U.S. Aviation Passenger Rights: Legal Framework and

Oversight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479

1. Multiple Levels of Airline Passenger Protection . . 479

2. The Passenger Bill of Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481

C. Issues with U.S. Aviation Passenger Dispute Resolution

Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 483

III. ADR IN AVIATION DISPUTES: AN OVERVIEW WITH A FOCUS ON

THE EU SYSTEM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 484

A. ADR: Def‌inition and Evolution . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 484

B. Framework of the EU Aviation Passenger Dispute ADR System 485

1. EU Regulation of the Protection of Passenger

Rights: Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004 . . . . . . . . . 485

2. The EU’s First Consumer ADR Directive: Directive

No. 2013/11/EU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487

3. Current ADR Avenues for Resolving Aviation

Passenger Disputes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488

C. Spain’s ADR System for Aviation Passenger Disputes. . . . . . 490

1. Overview of Spain’s New Regulation TMA/201/

2022 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 490

2. Aviation Passenger Dispute ADR System Under the

Spain’s New Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491

D. Germany’s ADR System for Aviation Passenger Disputes .. . . 493

E. Evaluating the German and Spanish Models . . . . . . . . . . . 494

IV. ADR PROPOSALS FOR U.S. AVIATION PASSENGER RIGHTS . . . . . . . 495

A. Specialized ADR Bodies for Aviation Passenger Disputes .. . . 495

B. Promoting Private ADR Systems Through Legislative and

Regulatory Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496

C. Developing ODR Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 497

GEORGETOWN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

474 [Vol. 55