The case concerned a disabled passenger, Bob Ross, who has
cerebral palsy and arthritis. Mr Ross does not need a wheelchair at
all times but is unable to stand for any considerable time, so he
did need one to get from Ryanair's check-in desk to the departure
gate at Stansted Airport. He was charged £18 for use of a
wheelchair but argued that this was discrimination.
Under the UK's Disability Discrimination Act, service providers
must make reasonable adjustments for disabled persons. Such an
adjustment, Mr Ross argued, would be the provision of a free
wheelchair. With support from the Disability Rights Commission
(DRC), Mr Ross sued both Ryanair and Stansted Airport Limited. In
January 2004, a county court decided that Ryanair was liable.
Ryanair was pilloried in the press on the back of January's
ruling that it had discriminated against the disabled. However, the
majority of the coverage overlooked Ryanair's argument in the case.
The airline accepted at the start of the first court case that Mr
Ross should not have to pay for rental of a wheelchair and that he
had been discriminated against; its argument was simply that it
should be Stansted Airport, not Ryanair, that should absorb the
cost.
Ryanair had pointed out in the case that Mr Ross had bought his
ticket to Perpignan for just £10. Before the trial, the airline had
argued in a letter to the DRC that, for wheelchair bound
passengers, "we actually spend more money to carry them to/from our
aircraft than they pay us for the entire fare."
However, Stansted argued that it was customary for the passenger
to become the responsibility of the airline once checked in. Only
at Kerry Airport, said Stansted, does the cost of providing
wheelchair assistance lie with the airport.
Judge Crawford Lindsay QC accepted Stansted's arguments and
awarded Mr Ross compensation of £1,000 for injury to feelings, £36
for the two payments of £18 (he was travelling on a return flight
to Perpignan, France) and £300 reimbursement for the wheelchair Mr
Ross felt compelled to buy for future use.
The airline reacted to the judgment by announcing that it would
add 50p to the price of every ticket to cover the cost of providing
wheelchairs. It also lodged an appeal. Following a hearing last
month, Lord Justice Brooke handed down his detailed judgment
yesterday. Lord Justice Jonathan Parker and Lord Justice Keene
simply agreed with his opinion.
Both the DRC and Ryanair claimed victory last night.
DRC Chairman Bert Massie said:
"This decision sends a signal to every
airport and airline that disabled people will no longer put up with
a second class service. And that they have the firm backing of the
law to ensure that fair treatment prevails."
Ryanair welcomed the decision to "finally establish the
responsibility of the British Airport Authority to provide for
wheelchair assistance for passengers." The airline said it
vindicates its decision to appeal the case, but also expressed
disappointment that the Court of Appeal "did not establish that BAA
was 100% responsible". The airline said it will be reducing its
wheelchair levy by 50%.
Ryanair's Head of Communications, Paul Fitzsimmons, added:
"Ryanair will continue to fight to lower the
cost of air travel for all passengers and it is not unreasonable
that the very rich owners of terminal buildings such as BAA
Stansted should be responsible for providing free of charge
wheelchair access through these complicated terminal buildings for
those with limited mobility."
The court's most difficult challenge was not to determine
whether Mr Ross had been discriminated against but to attribute
blame – and that was resolved with much reference to contractual
details. However, some points came out in the Appeal Court ruling
that will be of interest to observers of disability discrimination
law generally, including those seeking further guidance on how far
a web site operator must go to ensure that his web site is
accessible to disabled internet users.
Lord Justice Brooke cited another recent case involving a train
passenger with mobility problems. The Court of Appeal gave its
ruling in that case last month, finding that Central Trains acted
unlawfully by not paying the cost of passenger Keith Roads' cab
fare to transport him across an area that was inaccessible to his
wheelchair.
Lord Justice Brooke endorsed the view of Lord Justice Sedley in
that judgment, when Sedley said that the policy of the 1995
legislation "is not a minimalist policy of simply ensuring that
some access is available to the disabled: it is so far as
reasonably practicable, to approximate the access enjoyed by
disabled persons to that enjoyed by the rest of the public."
The duty to make adjustments is one that is owed "to disabled
persons as a class and not to any particular claimant," said Lord
Justice Brooke – adding that this was also made clear by
Sedley.
Lord Justice Brooke continued: "There was no suggestion that it
was not reasonably practicable for Ryanair and/or [Stansted
Airport] to provide a wheelchair without cost, given their
financial resources."
He concluded:
"The evidence revealed the commendable
efforts [Stansted Airport] had made to comply with their
obligations under the Act. In 1997 Stansted Airport won the EASE
award of the Queen Elizabeth Foundation for Disabled People on
account of the high standard of the facilities and access for the
disabled at the airport. Three years later they were among the
finalists for the same award. [Stansted's] liability in this case
arises not because of any reluctance on their part to fulfil their
overall responsibilities towards the disabled, but because they
failed to recognise that they had important responsibilities under
the Act which simply were not being fulfilled by anyone once
Ryanair had decided to break away from the industry's customary
practice in 1995 in their pursuit of a cheaper 'no frills' service
for their clientele, a service which has proved to be very popular.
[Stansted'] failure is a serious one, which is not in any way
excused by the unlawfulness of Ryanair's policy."
The result was that Ryanair's appeal was dismissed in so far as
the airline sought to escape all liability; but Stansted Airport
was ordered to contribute 50% of Ryanair's liability as to damages
and interest. The payment of legal costs has yet to be
determined.
