Most cases settle privately outside of court. Defendants and insurers need to know that a firm is ready and willing to fully litigate before they will agree to a fair settlement. CFM has a reputation for taking cases to trial and fighting important pre-trial motions. Some published decisions in our cases are listed below.

v. Ukraine International Airlines, 2024 ONSC 3303 (PS752 shootdown)

CFM represented the families of 21 passengers killed in the downing of PS752 by Iran. We were lead counsel for the plaintiffs at the 18-day trial, where we successfully established that UIA had not performed a reasonable risk assessment in the face of escalating military tensions in the region. The court held that UIA was responsible for paying 100% of the plaintiffs’ losses.

Carrol-Byrne v. Canada (Transportation Safety Board), 2022 SCC 48

CFM represented the passengers of Air Canada Flight 624, which crashed in Halifax. Together with other parties, CFM was successful in obtaining production of the flight’s cockpit voice recorder and confirming at the Supreme Court of Canada that the proper test was applied.

Cohen v. Northern Thunderbird Air, 2017 BCSC 315

CFM was successful in obtaining production of the cockpit voice recorder in a lawsuit arising ouf the crash of a Northern Thunderbird King Air that crashed on approach to Vancouver International Airport.

Postma v Horizon Helicopters, 2016 YKCA 12

The firm represented two workers who were seriously injured in a Robinson 44 crash near Carcross, Yukon. CFM was successful in establishing that the damages recoverable were not capped by the insurance policy held by the operator.

Abdulrahim v. Air France, 2010 ONCA 403 and 2011 ONSC 398

CFM represented passengers who were injured when Air France 358 crashed into a ravine at the end of the runway at Toronto Pearson International Airport. The firm negotiated a settlement on behalf of the class that was approved by the court. Justice Strathy described the outcome as “real justice for real people who were victims of a very serious aviation accident.”

Carpenter v. Whistler Air Services,  2004 BCSC 1510

The firm successfully represented two passengers injured in the crash of a Beaver float plane into Green Lake at Whistler, BC.  The judgment at trial included a significant award for loss of earning capacity arising from mental injuries sustained in the accident.

Chadwick v. Canada (Attorney General), 2008 BCSC 1141

The firm successfully argued that a manufacturer of aircraft fuel pumps was required to produce documents pertaining to the history of fuel leakage in pumps sharing a common design as the fuel pump in issue in the case.

Chadwick v. Canada (Attorney General),2010 BCSC 1744

CFM successfully opposed a motion to have a case against Transport Canada dismissed. The court accepted CFM’s argument that Transport Canada may be liable to our clients for approving a maintenance facility that did not meet the regulatory requirements.

Cole v. E&B Helicopters Ltd., 2008 BCSC 12 (CanLII)

The firm represented the pilot killed in the crash of a Robinson R22 helicopter and successfully argued that an investigator from the Transportation Safety Board be compelled to testify at trial regarding various tests which were conducted by the TSB on the helicopter’s electrical system following the accident.

Coronation Insurance Company v. Taku Air Transport Ltd.,[1991] 3 SCR 622

This case was brought on behalf of a passenger of a commercial Beaver flight which crashed. The action went to the Supreme Court of Canada and is one of the leading authorities in the area of aviation insurance law.

Forsyth et al. v. Sikorsky et al.,2000 BCSC 642 (CanLII) (Defective Helicopter Component)

This case arises out of the crash of a Sikorsky S-58T in which two pilots and a maintenance engineer suffered serious personal injury. The court found that a manufacturing defect was 50% responsible for the crash. Again, this case has been cited as one of the leading authorities on product liability in aviation context.

Hayes Heli-Log Services Ltd.  v. Acro Aerospace Inc., 2006 BCCA 419 (CanLII)

The firm represented pilots injured in the crash of a Sikorsky S-61 helicopter and successfully argued at the Court of Appeal that Sikorsky’s comments on a draft Canadian Transportation Safety Board (“TSB”) report were not privileged under the TSB Act when those comments had been provided to the United States Federal Aviation Administration.

Huxley v. Aquila Air Ltd., [1995] 6 WWR 149 (BC SC)

This case arose out of the fatal crash of a commuter flight from Nanaimo Cassidy Airport to Vancouver International Airport. The decision in this case is one of the leading Canadian authorities on the question of success of carriage under the Warsaw Convention.

Nunes v. Air Transat, 2005 CanLII 21681 (On SC) (Settlement Approval)

Paneak v. Heli-Max Limited, 2006 NUCA 04 (CanLII)

The firm successfully represented the estate of a university student killed in a helicopter crash in Nunavut.  At the trial level, the firm successfully argued that under the Nunavut Trustee Act, claims for loss of earning capacity survive death so as to allow the estate to recover damages for prospective loss of earning capacity.  The decision was upheld by the Nunavut Court of Appeal in one of the first civil appeals heard by that Court and established the law on this issue in both Nunavut and the Northwest Territories.

Rogers v. Air BC

This case pertained to a passenger who met his death while exiting an Air B.C. floatplane. The matter was favourably concluded both at the trial and at the Court of Appeal level.

Sabourin et al. v. Watterodte et al., 2004 BCSC 243 (CanLII) (Mid Air Collision)

*References to successful case results where the lawyers at CFM Lawyers have acted for clients are not necessarily indicative of future results. The outcome of every legal proceeding will vary according to the facts in each individual case.

Have you worked under the Warsaw or Montreal Conventions?

Most accidents that occur on commercial international or connecting flights are governed by the Montreal Convention, or its predecessor, the Warsaw Convention. These Conventions establish a legal regime that is distinct from the law that applies to domestic flights.

If you have been injured in an aviation accident or lost a family member, it is very important to understand which legal regime applies to your case. Your legal rights and the jurisdictions in which you can sue depend on it, so the Conventions need to be considered before filing a lawsuit.

We have a very good understanding of the Montreal and Warsaw Conventions. We have represented the families of passengers who have been killed in crashes governed by these Conventions, as well as passengers who have been injured in accidents.