EU Court Rules That Pets Are Legally Classified As Luggage on Planes

In recent years, huge strides have been made to recognize pets as living, loved creatures rather than mere objects. Last summer, a New York judge ruled that pets are considered “immediate family,” and guardians who witness their pet’s wrongful death are entitled to compensation for emotional distress. Even more recently, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed a bill stating that a pet’s welfare must legally be considered when determining custody after a divorce. But there’s still a way to go — and not all courts come to the same conclusion. This month, the European Court of Justice announced that pets flying on planes are officially considered baggage.

The decision arose after a passenger, Gisel Ortiz — referred to as Felicísima in documents — filed a claim against Iberia airline. In 2019, her dog, Mona, was checked into a flight at Buenos Aires airport and put into a special crate. According to court documents, the dog’s size required her to be placed in the plane’s cargo hold rather than the cabin. While being transported to the plane by airline staff, Mona escaped. She was never found, and Ortiz filed a claim for €5,000 in non-material damages.

“Many people laugh because they don’t understand what Mona means to me,” Ortiz told Clarín in 2020. “Since she went missing, all I do is cry and stay glued to my phone waiting for a miracle.”

A Spanish court that took on the case stated that animals are sentient beings, so “their loss causes psychological harm that is not comparable, generally speaking, to that caused by the loss of a simple set of things corresponding to the concept of ‘luggage.’” They referred the case to the European Court of Justice, asking whether or not pets should be excluded from the concept of baggage.

The court found that, under their interpretation of the Montreal Convention, which states that airlines are responsible for the damage sustained to baggage during the flight period, pets are considered luggage. “The Montréal convention clearly refers to persons and baggage,” the court said. “It therefore follows from the clear wording of this provision that the term ‘persons’ covers ‘passengers’, such that a pet cannot be considered a ‘passenger.’”

To have any luggage be considered uniquely precious and expensive, a passenger must make a special declaration of interest at the time of checking the bag. Ortiz was rewarded only €1,578.82.

“I believe that a great opportunity has been missed to continue raising awareness of the rights of animals and the people who care for them,” Carlos Villa Corta, Ortiz’s lawyer, told The Guardian. “Ultimately, the ECJ considers that pets do not deserve special or enhanced legal protection compared to a simple suitcase.”