Had anyone reported injuries immediately, SSV would be surely be legally obliged to act, and wouldn't they now be facing criminal charges for not doing so?
I have no understanding what the above is meant to convey.
There is no legal obligation that an injured passenger immediately report an injury. It would be common sense to do so, but it is not required.
If a broken ankle was reported, Skyservice would be under no legal obligation to "act" (whatever that means), although it would be prudent for it to offer first aid and appropriate assistance in disembarking. If the airline's employees just said "too bad" and ignored a complaint of a specific injury, Skyservice would likely have be pillored in the press, but no criminial charges would be laid: that's a rather ridiculous suggestion.
Speaking of matters legal:
this development in the Air Transat case just came to my attention, although it was apparently reported almost four months ago.
$40,000+ per passenger seems like a heck of a lot to me; especially since, to the best of my knowledge, only 10 or 11 passengers were slightly injured (during the emergency evacuation).
I always thought that recovery for pure emotional distress is not allowed under the Warsaw system [see generally
Eastern Airlines v. Floyd, 499 U.S. 530 (1991), a case involving almost identical facts as the 2001 Azores incident]. Post-traumatic stress disorder doesn't qualify for compensation [
Bobian v. CA Czech Airlines, 232 F.Supp. 2d 319 (2002)], nor do other forms of pure mental illness [
King (AP) v. Bristow Helicopters Limited (Scotland), In re M (A Child by her Litigation Friend CM) (FC)], [2002] 2 All E.R. 565]. But hey, what do I know?
