Air Canada Cleared of Liability in Airport Lounge Oatmeal Burn Incident
A British Columbia tribunal has determined that Air Canada is not responsible for compensating a passenger who sustained burns while serving himself oatmeal at one of the airline's airport lounges. The decision, released on January 23, 2026, addresses a claim for $5,000 in damages filed by Craig Hannon following an incident at Vancouver International Airport in May 2023.
Details of the Burn Incident and Medical Treatment
On May 11, 2023, Craig Hannon was waiting for his flight to Las Vegas via San Francisco in the Air Canada Maple Leaf Lounge at Vancouver International Airport. According to tribunal documents, Hannon attempted to ladle oatmeal from a self-serve heated container when the "watery and extremely hot" substance splashed onto his hand, causing immediate pain.
Hannon reported that he requested a first aid kit from lounge staff but was told none was available—a claim that Air Canada disputes. He subsequently ran his hand under cold water in the lounge and purchased Polysporin ointment at the airport before proceeding with his travel plans.
Upon arriving in Las Vegas, Hannon visited a medical centre where he was diagnosed with first-degree burns to the top of his hand and index finger, along with second-degree burns to his thumb. Medical documentation indicated that the injuries took more than a month to fully heal.
Legal Arguments and Tribunal Analysis
In his claim, Hannon sought approximately $2,200 for medical expenses and nearly $2,800 for non-pecuniary damages related to pain and suffering. Tribunal member Alison Wake examined the case under two key pieces of legislation:
- The Carriage by Air Act (CAA) and Montreal Convention: Hannon argued that he was governed by the Montreal Convention, which applies to international flights, and that he was in the process of embarking when the incident occurred. However, Wake concluded that Hannon was not "in the course of embarking" as he was not at the departure gate nor acting under Air Canada's direction at the time of the injury.
- The Occupiers Liability Act (OLA): While Air Canada acknowledged owing a duty of care to Hannon as an occupier of the premises, Wake found that Hannon did not prove the oatmeal container created an "objectively unreasonable risk of harm." The tribunal emphasized that the standard is reasonableness, not perfection, and that the OLA does not require removal of every possible danger.
Wake wrote in her decision: "The fact that Mr. Hannon was injured while using the container is not, by itself, enough to meet that burden. The standard is reasonableness, not perfection. The OLA does not require Air Canada to remove every possibility of danger or ensure that users of the premises will be absolutely safe."
Broader Implications for Passenger Claims
This ruling highlights the legal thresholds that must be met for successful compensation claims against airlines in airport settings. Key considerations include:
- The specific timing and location of incidents relative to the boarding process
- The burden of proof regarding unreasonable risks in self-service facilities
- The distinction between unfortunate accidents and legally actionable negligence
While Air Canada acknowledged that the oatmeal caused Hannon's burns, the tribunal's analysis focused on the legal frameworks governing liability rather than disputing the factual circumstances of the injury itself. The decision serves as a reminder that not all injuries occurring in airport environments automatically qualify for compensation under existing aviation and liability laws.
