DVT - No right to sue

[fozzyo]

""The House of Lords ruled against eight DVT victims and their families who have been fighting for four

[Bazz]

A far reaching decision undoubtedly and one the airlines will be grateful for.

However...

The victims' lawyers say they may now take the fight to the European Courts.

They will also be campaigning for a change in the law, which they say is outdated.

...so we may not have heard the last of it.

[HighFlyer]

I think this case and others like it will go on and on until the law is changed. Its a real difficult one - airlines are not going to give more legroom to passengers until they are legally required to - enough people pay for economy seats on long haul. I guess that while that is the case, slipping a pamplet on DVT into the ticket wallet is their answer to tackling the situation.

My last ever Economy long haul flight was to JFK, i got off the plane and could barely walk, my legs were numb and i had terrible pins and needles. Now, is that my fault for not exercising my legs enough, is it the airlines fault for not telling me to (and how to) exercise my legs, or is it the airlines fault for not giving me enough room in my seat to exercise my legs? The jury is very much still out on that one in my book!

[ChuckC]

Interesting. But let's keep that quiet over here in the States, because our army of lawyers is always looking for new ideas, if you get my drift.

Seriously though, the issue has been publicized a lot. That's the good of it. Not certain whether airlines should be held liable for DVT unless, for example, they refuse to allow pax out of their seats for extended periods (ah, just answered my own question![i]).

Chuck-

VS Protect themselves against lawsuits related to DVT with:
- The in-flight health leaflet at check in
- The post-take off announcement.
- The travel health channel on the IFE.

Of course no specific mention is made of DVT (I'm sure the lawyers would not allow it)

Originally posted by csparker
VS Protect themselves against lawsuits related to DVT with:
- The in-flight health leaflet at check in
- The post-take off announcement.
- The travel health channel on the IFE.

Of course no specific mention is made of DVT (I'm sure the lawyers would not allow it)

Absolutely, on every flight I have been on over the last few years, they announce to drink alcohol in moderation only, get exercise, feel free to walk around the cabin, drink plenty of water etc..

In my view, any case dating back years, then it is a tough one, but for anyone claiming from a flight in the last 5 years or so is trying to cash in.

Its a matter of personal responsibility - if you eat too many bugers you get fat - its not MacDonalds fault. If you dont take the necessary precautions on a plane, having been told to do so, then it is also your fault.

Remember also that this isn't just about seat pitch, its about lack of movement. There was a case I remember where a passsenger died after a flight in Upper from SFO.

So the pitch of the seat is not necessarily the issue....

Well Richard I think we do need to be careful, there's plenty of evidence that restricted movement can cause blood clots whatever the influencing circumstances - and we have to agree that long stretches in small spaces could be considered one.

I'm very 50:50 on this issue. If I were to role play the defence lawyer I'm sure I'd examine every aspect of a litigants lifestyle to show contributing factors (whether diet, exercise, medical predisposition or other) have as much if not more effect and it would be a hard to secure an individual case. On the other hand there is no doubt that econ seats and the inability to be mobile are restrictive ... guess we'll have to watch and wait.

Space is a factor of airlines ability to secure revenue and pax ability to pay ... so unless the law tips the balance I wouldn't expect any change either.