Qatar Airlines being sued
Thread Starter
Qatar Airlines being sued
Finally something regarding this matter will happen. Here’s hoping.
https://www.theage.com.au/world/midd...22-p5bryy.html
https://www.theage.com.au/world/midd...22-p5bryy.html
Yes, that was disgusting.
Imagine travelling with your wife or daughter and the local authorities come on board and demand they be deplaned and subjected to that treatment.
Privacy was lacking as well, with some examinations being done in view of airport workers.
Imagine travelling with your wife or daughter and the local authorities come on board and demand they be deplaned and subjected to that treatment.
Privacy was lacking as well, with some examinations being done in view of airport workers.
What happened was terrible but their country their rules.
Something like:
"If we find a newborn baby anywhere in the terminal, all females shall be subject to an invasive procedure that will not guarantee any privacy or dignity, straight from the 7th century"
Something like that? So you can make an informed decision right? If you're male, I hope you're not married.
It's the Middle East. They don't need a specific law to do whatever they want. Spend any amount of time in the region and you would know this.
When the prime ministers own daughter has to be tracked down and forced to return to Dubai, something is very wrong.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sk...ncess-12225379
When the prime ministers own daughter has to be tracked down and forced to return to Dubai, something is very wrong.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sk...ncess-12225379
People see the fancy advertisements and the shiny aircraft but the reality is that your travelling to a place that is a backwater shit hole still stuck in the middle ages. Don't travel with these airlines.
The following users liked this post:
A number of comments in the media article above suggest it was the Qatari government, not the airline, that conducted the 'searches'…..not that there is a great deal of difference and I'm sure those subjected to this treatment don't see a huge difference.
A question was asked but not answered. Was it only Qatar Airways pax that were subject to the procedure?
A question was asked but not answered. Was it only Qatar Airways pax that were subject to the procedure?
The implied threat of banning QATAR Airways from Australian airspace (effectively NZ as well) should be enough to get the ladies the compensation they deserve. This shows that even if you're not visiting and are just passing through in transit you can still get caught up in their medieval system.
Hopefully the likely substantial award that the Australian courts will give should set a precedent for the affected ladies of other nationalities.
Hopefully the likely substantial award that the Australian courts will give should set a precedent for the affected ladies of other nationalities.
Thread Starter
I thought I’d bring this back into the conversation since there’s been so much noise in the press lately about Qatar Airlines applying for more flights in and out of Australia. This would benefit whom?
Im glad to see it hasn’t been forgotten or forgiven.
Im glad to see it hasn’t been forgotten or forgiven.
No doubt it was appalling behaviour by those instructed to perform the “inspection” by Qatari government officials. However how does an Australian court have any jurisdiction over a foreign sovereign state? I cannot see how they can possibly succeed. The Montreal convention refers to “death or bodily injury”, difficult to prove an injury was sustained.
A number of comments in the media article above suggest it was the Qatari government, not the airline, that conducted the 'searches'…..not that there is a great deal of difference and I'm sure those subjected to this treatment don't see a huge difference.
The Aus government did nothing at the time of the alleged assaults. Bit hard to grandstand now.......unless you need a convenient straw to clutch at.
Thread Starter
However, there is a difference. If the Aus Govt is going to make a stand about this, then have the balls enough to say that Qatar is being refused extra landing rights because of the human rights violations of the Qatari Government. To me, Qatar Airways itself is entirely blameless. It wasn't the airline taking the passengers off the aircraft or conducting the searches. I doubt they even knew exactly what was going on at the time.
The Aus government did nothing at the time of the alleged assaults. Bit hard to grandstand now.......unless you need a convenient straw to clutch at.
The Aus government did nothing at the time of the alleged assaults. Bit hard to grandstand now.......unless you need a convenient straw to clutch at.
None of the ME3 do actually. All subsidised and wholly supported by their governments distorting the economic foundations of international travel due to the nature of their geography and wealth. Hardly tourism hotspots.
Fully funded, owned and regulated by their government. What difference does it make? They don’t deserve extra rights.
None of the ME3 do actually. All subsidised and wholly supported by their governments distorting the economic foundations of international travel due to the nature of their geography and wealth. Hardly tourism hotspots.
None of the ME3 do actually. All subsidised and wholly supported by their governments distorting the economic foundations of international travel due to the nature of their geography and wealth. Hardly tourism hotspots.
Fully funded, owned and regulated by their government. What difference does it make? They don’t deserve extra rights.
It was an embarrassment returning to this country on another airline.
The following 3 users liked this post by Mr Mossberg:
Qantas committed to hundreds of repatriation flights during that period. The crews involved spent countless hours away from their families in hotel quarantine while State "leaders" made up the rules on a daily basis. Qatar (and other operators) weren't subject to the ridiculous rules and quarantine requirements in their home countries that we were. The only thing that's embarrassing is the fact that you supported an airline that thinks it's ok to assault women. The fact we're even discussing letting this airline make more money off Australians is beyond my comprehension.
The following users liked this post:
I don't believe Qatar Airways flew most Aussies home. Whilst it's true for a short period Jul-Oct 20 the airline enjoyed the largest market share, ostensibly because other countries erred on the side of caution in the face of a biosecurity emergency, Singapore Airlines rapidly regained market share by Christmas 2020 and arguably deserves the title of airline carrying most Australians home during the pandemic. But that annoying fact never gets headlines.
Thread Starter
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/f...08-p5e360.html
Quote from article
“Etihad and Emirates, which are the only other carriers that fly between Australia and Europe through the Middle East, are operating less than half the flights they are entitled to under their bilateral air service agreement with Australia.
Australia’s agreement with the United Arab Emirates stipulates that Emirates and Etihad may collectively operate 168 weekly services to Australia’s four biggest airports. They are only operating 70, which is just over 40 per cent of their total allotment.”
If this is correct then obviously it isn’t viable to operate anymore flights. The market just isn’t big enough. Why then does Qatar think it viable? They don’t and they don’t care because they don’t make money anyway but just want access at any cost. One could argue that competing with the other two airlines, Etihad and Emirates, is what they really want. Gouge out some market share no matter the cost and once again undermine those airlines like Qantas that compete with over 30 other airlines in the international market in and out of Australia.
Quote from article
“Etihad and Emirates, which are the only other carriers that fly between Australia and Europe through the Middle East, are operating less than half the flights they are entitled to under their bilateral air service agreement with Australia.
Australia’s agreement with the United Arab Emirates stipulates that Emirates and Etihad may collectively operate 168 weekly services to Australia’s four biggest airports. They are only operating 70, which is just over 40 per cent of their total allotment.”
If this is correct then obviously it isn’t viable to operate anymore flights. The market just isn’t big enough. Why then does Qatar think it viable? They don’t and they don’t care because they don’t make money anyway but just want access at any cost. One could argue that competing with the other two airlines, Etihad and Emirates, is what they really want. Gouge out some market share no matter the cost and once again undermine those airlines like Qantas that compete with over 30 other airlines in the international market in and out of Australia.
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/f...08-p5e360.html
Quote from article
“Etihad and Emirates, which are the only other carriers that fly between Australia and Europe through the Middle East, are operating less than half the flights they are entitled to under their bilateral air service agreement with Australia.
Australia’s agreement with the United Arab Emirates stipulates that Emirates and Etihad may collectively operate 168 weekly services to Australia’s four biggest airports. They are only operating 70, which is just over 40 per cent of their total allotment.”
If this is correct then obviously it isn’t viable to operate anymore flights. The market just isn’t big enough. Why then does Qatar think it viable? They don’t and they don’t care because they don’t make money anyway but just want access at any cost. One could argue that competing with the other two airlines, Etihad and Emirates, is what they really want. Gouge out some market share no matter the cost and once again undermine those airlines like Qantas that compete with over 30 other airlines in the international market in and out of Australia.
Quote from article
“Etihad and Emirates, which are the only other carriers that fly between Australia and Europe through the Middle East, are operating less than half the flights they are entitled to under their bilateral air service agreement with Australia.
Australia’s agreement with the United Arab Emirates stipulates that Emirates and Etihad may collectively operate 168 weekly services to Australia’s four biggest airports. They are only operating 70, which is just over 40 per cent of their total allotment.”
If this is correct then obviously it isn’t viable to operate anymore flights. The market just isn’t big enough. Why then does Qatar think it viable? They don’t and they don’t care because they don’t make money anyway but just want access at any cost. One could argue that competing with the other two airlines, Etihad and Emirates, is what they really want. Gouge out some market share no matter the cost and once again undermine those airlines like Qantas that compete with over 30 other airlines in the international market in and out of Australia.
I thought the issue for the like of Etihad and Emirates (more so EK than EY as EY is a shell of an airline that it once was) is access to airframes and that they simply don’t have the capacity to ramp up operations any further? Happy to be corrected on that though!
