Various articles in this Journal from time to time have devoted attention to the unique opportunities presented by the United States legal system to victims of aviation accidents seeking to maximise the compensation that can be recovered for their losses. American courts offer a multiplicity of attractions to the foreign claimant. Quite apart from the traditional relative simplicity of persuading a U.S. jurisdiction to accept a case, the availability of liability doctrines such as that of strict liability in tort for product defects can dramatically improve the prospects for a successful outcome to the suit.

However, during the course of 1979 courts in several States of the Union have handed down decisions which have gone some way towards curtailing the hitherto apparently irresistible trend to ever wider privileges for the injured plaintiff. As the defence bar would describe it these decisions have begun the long overdue task of correcting the inbuilt and unjustified imbalance of due process in favour of the complainant. Whether this task will be continued or the recent judgments regarded as temporary lacunae remains to be seen. In any event, the aviation defence Bar at present seems to have some cause to shed the cloud of gloom surrounding it for the last few years.

In this note it is proposed to consider briefly issues raised in two decisions forming part of this recent pattern. One concerned the availability of the doctrine of strict liability to an airline plaintiff seeking damages against a manufacturer for property damage. The second built on the foundation laid by Ward, D.J., in Bouvy-Loggers v. Pan American World Airways Inc. (15 Avi. 17, 153), see [1978] 4 LMCLQ, at p. 614—and broadened the principles upon which defence pleas of forum non conveniens will be accepted thereby denying jurisdiction to the non-resident plaintiff.

To consider the strict liability issue first Scandinavian Airlines System v. United Aircraft Corporation (citation not yet available) was a hull recovery action brought against the manufacturer of the jet engines installed in the Douglas DC9 airliner by a major international airline and its insurers. In two separate incidents—in September, 1971 and June, 1972—damage was caused to engines and aircraft fuselages when first stage fan blades failed during high thrust accelerations on take-off.