The interpretation of the Article seems to be the crux of the appeal.
From the newspaper report:
Pel-Air's barrister Julian Sexton SC said use of the word "bodily" in the convention, shows that not everything was intended to be classified as an injury.
Perhaps lawyery types here can explain further.
I tend to agree with Band a Lot, thin edge of the wedge for precedent to be set for massive compensation payouts.