Detaining pax on board - Legalities?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Summer
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Discokid, not so fast.
There are provisions in the body of laws, and orientations into the judicial system, for which one that commits misdemeanors (or lesser crimes) under special circumstances, emergency or self-protection, will not be charged, or even if so, most likey be acquitted in court. Again, I think this is true no matter the specific country.
The example about leaving a train is different altogether. In Italy, (and a lot of other countries for sure), if you put yourself or others into a position of danger by foolish and reckless acts, you can be charged for something like 'procuring alarm'.
On which I can agree if for example a train passenger wants to go walking in a snow blizzard. Or trying to find his way to apron on tarmac leaving an airplane.
So DistantRumble is correct, one that wants to leave to airplane should just ask for that firmly and be willing to summon police if necessary - Again you can do that in any country, much better if your own.
And, globalizer, I think that your observation about a body of UK law not applicable to UK airplanes standing on UK ground, is frankly risible - as mentioned before, Capt's magic powers end with the flight. Ask any friend with legal knowledge or search the Internet - you will learn that things like "Human Rights Act" are of universal value and applicability.
There are provisions in the body of laws, and orientations into the judicial system, for which one that commits misdemeanors (or lesser crimes) under special circumstances, emergency or self-protection, will not be charged, or even if so, most likey be acquitted in court. Again, I think this is true no matter the specific country.
The example about leaving a train is different altogether. In Italy, (and a lot of other countries for sure), if you put yourself or others into a position of danger by foolish and reckless acts, you can be charged for something like 'procuring alarm'.
On which I can agree if for example a train passenger wants to go walking in a snow blizzard. Or trying to find his way to apron on tarmac leaving an airplane.
So DistantRumble is correct, one that wants to leave to airplane should just ask for that firmly and be willing to summon police if necessary - Again you can do that in any country, much better if your own.
And, globalizer, I think that your observation about a body of UK law not applicable to UK airplanes standing on UK ground, is frankly risible - as mentioned before, Capt's magic powers end with the flight. Ask any friend with legal knowledge or search the Internet - you will learn that things like "Human Rights Act" are of universal value and applicability.
stilljustanothernumber
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the night sky
Posts: 624
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you could then be arrested and prosecuted for trespassing on the railway which is a criminal offence!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: globally
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
with other companys it is possible to disembark. so it is most probably just for FR convenience (==>MONEY) reason, that FR is doing this and arguing with safety.
like george w. bush does whatever he wants and argues with "war against terror blabla.. "
like george w. bush does whatever he wants and argues with "war against terror blabla.. "
Pilots' Pal
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: USA
Age: 63
Posts: 1,158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it me? Maybe it's because I'm a mid-life crisis ridden, pedantic, crusty whinger but am I the only one that thinks the whole air travel experience is now something to be endured rather than enjoyed?
Flag carriers charging normal fares but providing low-cost service (if any), new "rules" citing "health and safety regulations", having to walk through security virtually naked, "look at the small print, it's all in there" etc, etc. Don't even mention over-the-top political correctness (whatever that is).
Flag carriers charging normal fares but providing low-cost service (if any), new "rules" citing "health and safety regulations", having to walk through security virtually naked, "look at the small print, it's all in there" etc, etc. Don't even mention over-the-top political correctness (whatever that is).
Bus 429,
>I'm a mid-life crisis ridden, pedantic, crusty whinger but am I the only one that thinks the whole air travel experience is now something to be endured rather than enjoyed?<
That makes two of us.
But the one that would be hard to disprove is the passenger who says he's ill - complaining about severe chest pains for instance. So he ends up in his local hospital and then they decide he's OK and can go home.
Hard to say how anybody (even FR) could hope to get away with refusing to let such a pax off the aircraft into an ambulance. Of course, if 6 or 10 did it, there could be an interesting situation, especially if one of them subsequently proved to be genuine.....
>I'm a mid-life crisis ridden, pedantic, crusty whinger but am I the only one that thinks the whole air travel experience is now something to be endured rather than enjoyed?<
That makes two of us.
But the one that would be hard to disprove is the passenger who says he's ill - complaining about severe chest pains for instance. So he ends up in his local hospital and then they decide he's OK and can go home.
Hard to say how anybody (even FR) could hope to get away with refusing to let such a pax off the aircraft into an ambulance. Of course, if 6 or 10 did it, there could be an interesting situation, especially if one of them subsequently proved to be genuine.....
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are (nearly) all missing the main point.
On a diversion, the aircraft will often be parked remotely, and/or without designated Handling Agent / Staff. It is not the crew/Captain holding you illegally, but pointing out that it would illegal for the PAX to disembark the aircraft.
In the UK, and no doubt similar laws elsewhere, wandering around an airport without the required passes, permissions and requirement to be there on duty, you are breaking the law - something like the "Aviation and Maritime Act of 200x" blah blah...
This is a legally correct avenue... if the police prove to be happy to act as a bus service. When PC Plod is also asked to open the baggage hold and get your bag out, he may decide a cup of tea with the crew, and leave you on board is easiest... 
Not surprised, it's hardly much more fun trying to work within it 
These rules / statements on disembarking are not specifically designed to cause the passenger(s) inconvieience. All those who advocate demanding your rights / getting off, reverse the situation. Aircraft diverts e.g. due weather, and you still want / need to get to your destination. The alternatives are either a 1-2 hour delay in getting there whilst refuelling and weather improvement comes, or a potentially 12+ hour delay while Pax A walks off, leaves his bag on board, no designated handling agent to remove it, crew go out of hours etc.
On a diversion, the aircraft will often be parked remotely, and/or without designated Handling Agent / Staff. It is not the crew/Captain holding you illegally, but pointing out that it would illegal for the PAX to disembark the aircraft.
In the UK, and no doubt similar laws elsewhere, wandering around an airport without the required passes, permissions and requirement to be there on duty, you are breaking the law - something like the "Aviation and Maritime Act of 200x" blah blah...
If the captain says no, then just ask for the Police to be called [ if in UK or Ireland ] Alternatively call them yourself. When they arrive ask for an escort to the terminal.
crusty whinger but am I the only one that thinks the whole air travel experience is now something to be endured rather than enjoyed?
These rules / statements on disembarking are not specifically designed to cause the passenger(s) inconvieience. All those who advocate demanding your rights / getting off, reverse the situation. Aircraft diverts e.g. due weather, and you still want / need to get to your destination. The alternatives are either a 1-2 hour delay in getting there whilst refuelling and weather improvement comes, or a potentially 12+ hour delay while Pax A walks off, leaves his bag on board, no designated handling agent to remove it, crew go out of hours etc.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: BRU
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spiegel.de reports that BA kept passengers onboard at Berlin-Tegel for 7 hours, as the departure was delayed due to bad weather. 8 passengers left the plane after five hours of waiting after having called the police.
Article in German:
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,392786,00.html
FLUGHAFEN TEGEL
Kapitän hält Fluggäste stundenlang fest
Schlechtes Wetters und ein störrischer Pilot haben die Passagiere eines British-Airways-Jets auf eine harte Geduldsprobe gestellt: Sieben Stunden lang mussten sie in ihrer Maschine ausharren. Erst als einige Fluggäste die Polizei riefen, öffnete der Kapitän wieder die Türen.
Berlin - Das Flugzeug, das planmäßig um 7.35 Uhr in Richtung London starten sollte, hob erst um 14.38 Uhr ab, wie Flughafen-Sprecher Ralf Kunkel sagte. Ursache der Verzögerung sei das schlechte Wetter gewesen.
Während der langen Wartezeit kam es an Bord zu einem Streit. Mehrere Passagiere hätten den Wunsch geäußert auszusteigen, sagte der Sprecher der Bundespolizei, Jörg Kunzendorf. Das sei ihnen jedoch vom Flugkapitän verweigert worden. Daraufhin hätten einige Fluggäste nach vier Stunden den Polizei-Notruf 110 gewählt und mitgeteilt, dass sie gegen ihren Willen festgehalten würden.
Die Information ging bei der Bundespolizei Angaben des Sprechers zufolge gegen zwölf Uhr ein. Zwei Beamte begaben sich daraufhin nach Tegel und sprachen mit dem Piloten. Erst dann gestattete dieser acht Reisenden, die Maschine zu verlassen. Sie traten anschließend vom Flug zurück.
Nach Angaben des Sprechers befand sich die Maschine bereits auf dem Vorfeld zwischen Warteposition und Enteisungsanlage. Deshalb konnten die Passagiere nicht aussteigen. Warum das Flugzeug nicht zum Terminal zurückkehrte, konnte er nicht sagen. Eine Sprecherin von British Airways in London bestätigte heute den Vorfall. Details konnte sie zunächst noch nicht nennen.
Article in German:
http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,392786,00.html
FLUGHAFEN TEGEL
Kapitän hält Fluggäste stundenlang fest
Schlechtes Wetters und ein störrischer Pilot haben die Passagiere eines British-Airways-Jets auf eine harte Geduldsprobe gestellt: Sieben Stunden lang mussten sie in ihrer Maschine ausharren. Erst als einige Fluggäste die Polizei riefen, öffnete der Kapitän wieder die Türen.
Berlin - Das Flugzeug, das planmäßig um 7.35 Uhr in Richtung London starten sollte, hob erst um 14.38 Uhr ab, wie Flughafen-Sprecher Ralf Kunkel sagte. Ursache der Verzögerung sei das schlechte Wetter gewesen.
Während der langen Wartezeit kam es an Bord zu einem Streit. Mehrere Passagiere hätten den Wunsch geäußert auszusteigen, sagte der Sprecher der Bundespolizei, Jörg Kunzendorf. Das sei ihnen jedoch vom Flugkapitän verweigert worden. Daraufhin hätten einige Fluggäste nach vier Stunden den Polizei-Notruf 110 gewählt und mitgeteilt, dass sie gegen ihren Willen festgehalten würden.
Die Information ging bei der Bundespolizei Angaben des Sprechers zufolge gegen zwölf Uhr ein. Zwei Beamte begaben sich daraufhin nach Tegel und sprachen mit dem Piloten. Erst dann gestattete dieser acht Reisenden, die Maschine zu verlassen. Sie traten anschließend vom Flug zurück.
Nach Angaben des Sprechers befand sich die Maschine bereits auf dem Vorfeld zwischen Warteposition und Enteisungsanlage. Deshalb konnten die Passagiere nicht aussteigen. Warum das Flugzeug nicht zum Terminal zurückkehrte, konnte er nicht sagen. Eine Sprecherin von British Airways in London bestätigte heute den Vorfall. Details konnte sie zunächst noch nicht nennen.
I call you back
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Alpha quadrant
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are in the air and consider that someone is acting illegally the Captain can take any reasonable action to protect the pax, crew and aircraft.
If you are on the ground and think a passenger disembarking may be illegal, you must call the local police as any action by you could be seen to deny the individual of their rights and you could be personally liable.
The bottom line of course of the original memo ( if accurate ) is cost not security or any other issue.
If you are on the ground and think a passenger disembarking may be illegal, you must call the local police as any action by you could be seen to deny the individual of their rights and you could be personally liable.
The bottom line of course of the original memo ( if accurate ) is cost not security or any other issue.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps people should remember;
1. Ryanair aircraft are not UK aircraft, they are Ryanair Aircraft. Currently registered in Ireland. Ireland is not part of the UK.
2. For security reasons, at airports, all persons including crew wo do not hold a local security pass / apron pass are required to be escorted from the aircraft to the appropriate part of the Terminal.
If a British Airways aircraft diverts to East Midlands enroute to Birmingham, the crew as well as the passengers for reasons of security are not allowed to pass unescorted between the aircraft and the terminal building. That is a fact of life.
As for ringing the police, thanks, we will be sure to remind passengers that mobile telephones must not be used until passengers have left the aircraft after the flight. When the police arrive, we will have the person who used the mobile phone illegally arrested for that offence.
Go ahead punk, make my day!
Regards,
DFC
1. Ryanair aircraft are not UK aircraft, they are Ryanair Aircraft. Currently registered in Ireland. Ireland is not part of the UK.
2. For security reasons, at airports, all persons including crew wo do not hold a local security pass / apron pass are required to be escorted from the aircraft to the appropriate part of the Terminal.
If a British Airways aircraft diverts to East Midlands enroute to Birmingham, the crew as well as the passengers for reasons of security are not allowed to pass unescorted between the aircraft and the terminal building. That is a fact of life.
As for ringing the police, thanks, we will be sure to remind passengers that mobile telephones must not be used until passengers have left the aircraft after the flight. When the police arrive, we will have the person who used the mobile phone illegally arrested for that offence.
Go ahead punk, make my day!
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Egcc
Posts: 1,695
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DFC
Not so DFC. How come I and my crew can walk to and from aircraft across the apron on a daily basis when operating away from base? There is no such requirement.
PP
For security reasons, at airports, all persons including crew wo do not hold a local security pass / apron pass are required to be escorted from the aircraft to the appropriate part of the Terminal.
PP
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: london/UK
Posts: 499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are matters that have been mentioned, but missed.
1. Ryanair aircraft are registered in the ROI. However the ROI is covered by the European Convention on Human Rights, and is in Irish law.
2. Mention has been made of the various acts in the UK that cover being airside. None of these have powers of arrest attatched to them which include 'any person', nor are they arrestable offences under the Police and criminal evidence act. Therefore a police officer may be able to arrest, an aircraft captain cannot.
Speaking as a non pilot with no axe to grind, it sounds like Ryanair trying to avoid extra delay at a divertion, and has nothing whatsoever to do with security.
As to contractual reasons for a detention, that would be like saying if you go to a restraunt, you will not be permitted to leave until you have eaten the meal you ordered. While I understand air transport is not exactly the same, the principle is.
NigelOnDraft is almost right I would say, except it is for the airport managments security to provide an escort etc if there is no handling agent. A pax in these circumstances has not committed an offence until he actually leaves, and even then it is debatable.
As for PC Plod having a cup of tea with the crew, mine was always coffee with 2 sugars!
1. Ryanair aircraft are registered in the ROI. However the ROI is covered by the European Convention on Human Rights, and is in Irish law.
2. Mention has been made of the various acts in the UK that cover being airside. None of these have powers of arrest attatched to them which include 'any person', nor are they arrestable offences under the Police and criminal evidence act. Therefore a police officer may be able to arrest, an aircraft captain cannot.
Speaking as a non pilot with no axe to grind, it sounds like Ryanair trying to avoid extra delay at a divertion, and has nothing whatsoever to do with security.
As to contractual reasons for a detention, that would be like saying if you go to a restraunt, you will not be permitted to leave until you have eaten the meal you ordered. While I understand air transport is not exactly the same, the principle is.
NigelOnDraft is almost right I would say, except it is for the airport managments security to provide an escort etc if there is no handling agent. A pax in these circumstances has not committed an offence until he actually leaves, and even then it is debatable.
As for PC Plod having a cup of tea with the crew, mine was always coffee with 2 sugars!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: About 3000 below Midhurst SID I reckon
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we will be sure to remind passengers that mobile telephones must not be used until passengers have left the aircraft
In a delay on ground, the captain can offer permission for passengers to use mobiles when engines are off.
There are many factors as to why passengers may not or cannot leave the aircraft........
No groundstaff in place so passenger could end up on tarmac wandering around.
No jetty or step drivers available to allow disembarkation.
Area of airport where aircraft is now parked is not compatible for disembarkation.
Transit or immigration regulations.
Lack of documentation for passengers to clear immigration.
Authorities know who is arriving and leaving their ports. Passports are checked but in many places names not noted. If therer are no handling systems in place, they wouldn't have access to these names. Deportees or criminals could wander off into another country.
Security. Either through it not being feasible to locate one bag in 600, but also to avoid any possible terrorism risk.
Time. To get all the teams together to get a handful of passengers airside could take a while, and also there's the aspect of an aircraft giving a ready message to ATC, which could mean only a short delay, retracting this in order to arrange getting pax offloaded could cause a much longer delay.
Cost. At an unknown or ad-hoc outstation, there may be additional handling costs in addition to landing fees, fuel and water uplift, etc.
and the list goes on......
It's not so much of a problem if the arrival airport changes to another in the UK due to our immigration regs.
If a Captain or airline knows for definite that the delay will be X hours, then they can make a decision. Unfortunately, even Mystic Meg couldnt predict expected exact delay times.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Here there and everywhere
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bjcc thanks for bringing a measure of common sense to the highly opinionated ramblings on this thread. The level of confidence that some posters have here in asserting the various conflicting points of view is revealing. I say this since getting it wrong might get a captain into quite a lot of trouble and I would have thought a bit more caution than certainty might be appropriate. For my part I think you have hit it on the head with your observation
Speaking as a non pilot with no axe to grind, it sounds like Ryanair trying to avoid extra delay at a divertion, and has nothing whatsoever to do with security.
ZbV
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Samsonite
Age: 51
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diversion
A LH flight from Frankfurt to San Fransisco diverts to Oakland 12 miles away on the other side of the bay. PAX kept onboard and not allowed to disembark. Why? LH has no traffic rights to OAK.
Just a week or so ago most of Persian/Arabian Gulf airports where closed for hours due to fog aircraft divert all over. Singapore Airlines SIN-DXB flight diverted to Sharjah less than 12nm away from DXB. Again PAX where kept onboard for the reasons allready mentioned such as lack of groundhandling equipment, facilities and most important: Traffic rights to SHJ.
There is a big difference between words "Keep" and "Detain". While diverting you are keeping PAX onboard, certainly not illegal, and has nothing to do with a detention as described in various laws around the world.
Furthermore captain/commander does have the right to "Detain and hold" a PAX suspected (Probable cause) or caught in criminal activity (Unruly, violent etc) onboard until such time the PAX can be handed over to the authorities.
Just a week or so ago most of Persian/Arabian Gulf airports where closed for hours due to fog aircraft divert all over. Singapore Airlines SIN-DXB flight diverted to Sharjah less than 12nm away from DXB. Again PAX where kept onboard for the reasons allready mentioned such as lack of groundhandling equipment, facilities and most important: Traffic rights to SHJ.
There is a big difference between words "Keep" and "Detain". While diverting you are keeping PAX onboard, certainly not illegal, and has nothing to do with a detention as described in various laws around the world.
Furthermore captain/commander does have the right to "Detain and hold" a PAX suspected (Probable cause) or caught in criminal activity (Unruly, violent etc) onboard until such time the PAX can be handed over to the authorities.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The statement to be read to Ryanair passengers by the captain, apparently during all diversions, is as follows:
Notwithstanding the interesting comments and speculations since the posting of the original memo at the start of this thread I am none the wiser as to whether or not this statement is correct. It does not look to me as if it is correct because it makes a blunt statement about "control of the captain" and "legality" (and not about lack of ground services, immigration, customs, space in the terminal building, the rights of the captain in particular circumstances, etc.).
It looks as though it may really mean "It is inconvenient to Ryanair if you try to disembark at the alternate airport ..." Can anyone with some legal training comment on the general claim about "illegality" contained in the Ryanair instruction to pilots? Could it be legal for a captain on another airline's diverted aircraft to let people off at the same alternate? Also, it seems rather unlikely that only Ryanair would suffers from such a general legal impediment.
It is prohibited by law for security reasons to allow any passengers to disembark at this airport, despite its proximity to your original destination. This situation is completely outside my control.
It looks as though it may really mean "It is inconvenient to Ryanair if you try to disembark at the alternate airport ..." Can anyone with some legal training comment on the general claim about "illegality" contained in the Ryanair instruction to pilots? Could it be legal for a captain on another airline's diverted aircraft to let people off at the same alternate? Also, it seems rather unlikely that only Ryanair would suffers from such a general legal impediment.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Six British Airways passengers file ‘false imprisonment’ report
BERLIN - Six German airline passengers who said they were being held against their will on an aircraft stuck on the runway for hours during a snowstorm have filed "false imprisonment" charges, German police said Saturday.
See website for more;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10627204/
Interested to read this and see the outcome. Hopefully the case will be thrown in the bin.
See website for more;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10627204/
Interested to read this and see the outcome. Hopefully the case will be thrown in the bin.