Taiwan’s regulations concerning air carriers’ liability for damages, as laid down in the Civil Aviation Act (民用航空法), are seriously out of line with the two major international aviation conventions — the 1929 Warsaw Convention, with its associated protocols and amendments, and the 1999 Montreal Convention. This disharmony is a serious impediment to improving the nation’s air-transport safety.
The act does not outline standards for air passenger carriers’ liability for damages or destruction or loss of passengers’ carry-on and consigned baggage, nor does it include regulations about cargo carriers’ liability. Instead, one must turn to the regulations of the Civil Code concerning passenger and freight transport.
The Regulations of Compensation For Damage Caused to Air Passengers and Freight (航空客貨損害賠償辦法), which were drawn up in accordance with the Civil Aviation Act, are based on the principle of full compensation for actual damages in relation to the extent of carriers’ liability for injury and death. The regulations set the minimum compensation for the death of each passenger at NT$3 million (US$99,967) and the minimum compensation for severe injury at NT$1.5 million. However, if damage does not cause death or severe injury, limited compensation applies and the maximum compensation payable is set at NT$1.5 million.
This sum is much lower than the maximum of 100,000 special drawing rights (about US$153,500) that is specified in the regulations of the two global conventions.
More importantly, under the two conventions, when a carrier’s negligence leads to the death or injury of one or more passengers, the carrier cannot claim for limited liability, while under the Civil Aviation Act, a carrier only loses the right to claim limited liability if its culpability reaches the level of gross negligence.
Passenger transport is different from cargo transport in that it involves human lives. The legal system must therefore set a high standard for passenger transport, and this is a common standpoint of all international aviation conventions.
Hopefully, the Ministry of Transport will consider bringing Taiwan’s aviation laws in line with international norms. As well as bringing about improvements in aviation safety
This would also be in line with key economic development policies.
Jao Juei-cheng is an associate professor at National Taiwan Ocean University’s Institute of the Law of the Sea and is secretary-general of the Taiwan Maritime Law Association.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS