The conflict between international and brazilian rules about indemnifications in international air transport involving consumer relations

Abstract

The present work studies the conflict between the indemnification rules applicable in cases of loss of consumers’ luggage in international air travel: the Warsaw and the Montreal Conventions or the Brazilian Consumer Code (CDC). It was found that the legal treatments are differentiated, since the International Conventions limits the responsibility of air transport, while the CDC is guided by the principle of full reparation, in addition to other distinctions rules. This research was questioned out of curiosity about the following central answer: what the current jurisprudence applies the norms in these cases of international consumers air travel? The objective of this Work is to demonstrate the normative conflict by the study about Brazilian jurisprudence. The methodology is of qualitative research, whose information was evaluated from the legal literature. The Federal Supreme Court (STF) concluded that the International Conventions about Air Transport are applicable to damages such as loss of luggage. On the other hand, in relation to moral damages, it was seen that the Treaties do not rule the subject, and the CDC is applicable, according to a recent understanding of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ).