When protestors against private aviation broke into Germany’s Sylt Airport in June and covered a Cessna Citation CJ1+ in orange paint, the damage, priced at over $1 million, was so extensive that the aircraft was deemed to be a write-off for insurance purposes. Insurance company executives speaking to AIN on condition of anonymity say that the industry is still struggling to assess how the spate of attacks by self-proclaimed eco-warriors will impact the way coverage is provided and what it will cost.
These attacks raise questions about who is liable, and that may need to be resolved through civil lawsuits against both the perpetrators and, possibly, service providers such as aircraft operators and FBOs. “I don’t expect to see private jet owners suing environmentalists,” one executive with a leading London-based insurance broker commented. “Billionaires going after jobless green protestors isn’t a good look.”
Beyond the political dimensions of this situation, these cases pose important questions—and not just about aircraft hull insurance. There are also considerations around the professional liability of companies and individuals in the business aviation sector.
“Some people don’t fully understand their exposure, and think that everything is covered by policies on the aircraft themselves,” said Melanie Daglish, a senior aviation underwriter at the International Transport Intermediaries Club (ITIC). She advises clients to carefully consider risks that might be excluded from the hull insurance, such as whether pilots were suitably qualified for a flight, which could have an impact on flight crew managers or those responsible for all aspects of operations. ITIC is a not-for-profit organization that specializes in providing professional indemnity insurance, protecting against losses suffered due to negligence, error, or omission.
According to Daglish, illegal or so-called “gray” charter flights are a particular area of concern, as exemplified by the fallout from the crash that killed soccer player Emiliano Sala in January 2019. It is now almost two years since David Henderson was found guilty of endangering the safety of an aircraft for his role in arranging a trip from France to Wales in an illegally chartered Piper Malibu.
ITIC has raised concerns that charter brokers could find themselves accused of deliberately or negligently arranging illegal or "gray" charters. It has warned that other parties—including aircraft management companies, aircraft registries, surveyors, and even regulators—could find themselves facing liability litigation.
“The Emiliano Sala case brought this into the spotlight, and the problem from a charter broker’s point of view is that it isn’t always black and white,” Daglish said. “There are finer points in terms of liability that could make a big difference and result in insurance cover being denied for something found to be an illegal operation. You need to consider what your role is and be able to demonstrate that you checked everything, such as AOCs [air operator certificates], certificates of airworthiness, et cetera.”
The ways that business models for private aircraft charter services keep evolving add to the complexity in terms of how liability might be assessed from an insurance point of view. Acknowledging the increased use of per-seat charters, booking apps, and flight sharing, Daglish told AIN that such arrangements, “make some insurers shudder a bit because they can seem quite opaque.”
Professional indemnity insurance can provide an important defense and backstop for companies and individuals, with payouts for things like legal costs. But, according to Daglish and her colleagues, it is no substitute for due diligence over all aspects of an operation. “What’s in the contract is very important, spelling out exactly what the liabilities are,” she advised, while also pointing to the value of training like that provided for brokers by the Air Charter Association and audits of aircraft and operators conducted by specialists like Wyvern and Argus.