Search

[This article discusses the relationship between Eurocontrol, the European organization for the safety and efficiency of air traffic management, henceforth also referred to as ATM, and the EC. Until a few years ago, the two organizations carried out complementary tasks. Their fields of activity did not overlap. This changed in 1997 with the establishment of Eurocontrol's revised Convention and the coming into being of the Single European Sky regulations in 2004, which provided for the accession of the EC to Eurocontrol whilst enhancing the regulatory forces of standards made by the latter organization. These events in effect made the relationship competitive rather than complementary. Various arrangements regulate this relationship. A balanced cooperation has yet to be found., ]

This chapter discusses a case which was decided by the Court of Appeal, la Cour d'appel , of Toulouse involving Airbus and Armavia Airlines. In it, important questions on the uniformity created by the Warsaw Convention of 1929, its exclusivity and the competency of courts as regulated by that convention were analysed. The chapter examines the proceedings of the case in the following order: establishment of the facts of the case; the initiation of legal proceedings; the claims made by Airbus; the position adopted by Armavia Airlines; the exclusivity of the Warsaw Convention; mandatory jurisdiction under the Warsaw Convention, and the Montreal Convention, 1999; and the decision of the Court of Appeal of Toulouse. Fortunately, the Court of Appeal followed the reasoning of Armenia Airlines. Hence, it gives support to the exclusivity of the Warsaw Convention and the mandatory nature of its rules on jurisdiction. Keywords: Airbus; Armavia Airlines; Court of Appeal of Toulouse; Montreal Convention; Warsaw Convention