The Montreal Convention vs. EU Regulation 261/2004: A Clash Over Exclusivity and Passenger Rights

Abstract

This paper investigates the legal conflict between the Montreal Convention's exclusivity principle (Article 29) and pro-passenger regional laws, exemplified by EU Regulation 261/2004. Through an analysis of legislative history and key Court of Justice of the European Union judgments, the study reveals a substantive conflict concerning flight delay compensation, where Regulation 261 imposes a standardized liability scheme that challenges the Convention's damages-based, exclusive regime. This conflict is contextualized within a broader doctrinal tension between the traditional value of treaty uniformity and the global trend toward enhanced consumer protection. The paper concludes that a balanced approach is necessary. It proposes a model for developing aviation markets like China that respects the Convention’s exclusivity for covered issues while legislatively supplementing its gaps and developing a robust, multi-tiered Alternative Dispute Resolution system to efficiently resolve disputes and protect passenger rights.