Decision No. 2-C-A-2023

[1] On January 18,2020, the applicants were scheduled to travel from Montréal, Quebec, to Ixtapa Zihuatanejo, Mexico, but they were refused transportation in Montréal.

[2] The applicants seek a compensation in the amount of CAD 2 400.00 per passenger, totalling CAD 4 800,00 under the Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR).

[3] In this decision, the role of the Canadian Transportation Agency (Agency) is to decide whether the respondent properly applied the provisions set out in its Tariff to the tickets the applicants purchased.

[4] The applicants submit that on November 29, 2019, they booked a trip from January 18, 2020 to February 1, 2020 with the Club Med travel agency. They claim that they had a check-in confirmation and received boarding passes when they arrived at the respondent’s check-in counter, on January 18, 2020.

[5] According to the applicants, the respondent denied them boarding because the flight was overbooked. The applicants indicate that they then contacted the travel agency to change their travel dates to be from January 25, 2020 to February 8, 2020.

[6] The respondent submits that the applicants booked a trip with the travel agency, on September 4, 2019, for November 30, 2019, to December 14, 2019. The respondent alleges that the applicants contacted the travel agency on November 29 to change their travel dates to be from January 18, 2020 to February 1, 2020.

[7] The respondent submits that the travel agency forgot to update the applicants’ tickets when changing their travel dates, on November 29, 2019, as the e-ticket numbers remained the same as the ones issued on September 4, 2019. In addition, Air Canada filed an email from the travel agency stating that it hadn’t change the tickets as it should have, and it was a mistake on its part.

[8] Consequently, the respondent submits that the applicants were not denied boarding because of overbooking, but because they did not have a valid reservation for the flight on January 18, 2020. Lastly, the respondent indicates that the flight was operated with six unoccupied seats, so that there were still available seats, contrarily to the applicants’ claim.

[9] When contradictory versions of events are presented by parties, the Agency must determine which of the different versions is more probable, based on the evidence.

[10] While the applicants were able to check in for the flight and get boarding passes, the Agency accepts the respondent’s version of events according to which the applicants did not have a valid reservation for the flight because of a mistake by the travel agency. The Agency’s conclusion is based on the flight operation report and the statements filed by the respondent.

[11] According to the tariff, a passenger without a valid ticket shall be refused transportation. The Agency therefore finds that the respondent properly applied the conditions of its Tariff by refusing to transport the applicants on January 18, 2020, and by not offering compensation for denied boarding.

[12] Consquently, the Agency dismisses the application.