Are Pets Luggage on Flights? The European Court’s Controversial Ruling
Introduction: A Lost Dog That Sparked a Legal Debate
A recent court case has stirred heated debate across Europe after a beloved pet went missing during an international flight.
According to reports, a passenger travelling from Buenos Aires to Barcelona with Iberia Airlines entrusted their dog to the airline for transport in the cargo hold. However, the dog escaped during loading and was never found. The distraught owner sued the airline for damages and the case made its way to the European Court of Justice (CJEU), the EU’s highest court.
The Court’s ruling, published this week, has shocked animal lovers: it declares that pets transported by air can legally be classified as baggage. This means that the loss of a pet during a flight will be treated under baggage liability rules, not as the loss of a living being.
This legal distinction has far-reaching implications not only for pet owners but also for airlines, insurers, and animal welfare advocates.
What the Court Decided
The European Court’s decision can be summarised as follows:
A pet transported on a flight is considered part of the passenger’s baggage under air transport regulations.
As such, the loss, injury, or death of a pet is subject to the same liability limits as lost or damaged luggage.
The airline’s responsibility is limited by the Montreal Convention, which caps compensation for baggage loss or damage.
While airlines remain liable, their financial responsibility is significantly restricted, and claims for emotional distress are unlikely to be recognised.
In practical terms, this means a pet’s loss in transit is viewed as a property loss, not as harm to a sentient family member.
Why This Ruling Matters
1. Clarifying a Legal Grey Area
Until now, EU law did not clearly define how pets should be classified during air transport. The Court’s ruling fills that gap — but in a way that many find troubling. By treating animals as baggage, it aligns them with objects rather than living beings.
2. Limited Compensation for Pet Owners
Under the Montreal Convention, compensation for lost baggage is capped at roughly €1,600 per passenger regardless of the item’s actual or emotional value.
If this rule applies to pets, the death or disappearance of a companion animal could be compensated at the same rate as a missing suitcase.
This may leave grieving owners not only heartbroken but also without meaningful legal redress.
3. A Step Backward for Animal Welfare
From an animal welfare perspective, the decision feels regressive. Pets are family to millions of people loved, cared for, and deeply mourned when lost. To classify them as cargo or baggage is to ignore their emotional and moral significance.
While the Court applied a strict legal interpretation, the outcome underscores the gap between human–animal relationships and commercial transport law.
4. New Challenges for Airlines
The ruling also has practical consequences for airlines. They may need to:
Review their pet transport policies and liability terms,
Reassess insurance coverage for animal carriage,
Provide clearer disclosures to passengers about the risks and limitations of transporting pets as cargo.
Airlines could face reputational damage if customers perceive this decision as an endorsement of treating pets as property rather than lives entrusted to their care.
What Pet Owners Should Know
If you are planning to fly with your pet within or from the EU, this decision makes it more important than ever to protect yourself and your animal.
Here are key steps to take:
Read the airline’s pet transport policy carefully.
Purchase pet transport insurance check that it covers loss, injury, and death during flights.
Document everything take photos before check-in, retain vet certificates and travel documents.
Request written clarification from the airline on liability and compensation terms.
These precautions can make a crucial difference if something goes wrong.
Critical Reflections
This case raises uncomfortable but important questions:
Should a sentient being ever be treated as “luggage”?
Do existing air transport laws adequately reflect modern views on animal sentience?
Will national courts interpret this EU ruling narrowly, or could they still allow compensation for emotional harm under domestic animal welfare laws?
While the Court’s decision provides legal clarity, it also exposes a moral blind spot — one that animal advocates across Europe are likely to challenge.
Conclusion: Law, Responsibility, and Compassion
The European Court’s ruling on lost pets in air transport represents a watershed moment. It defines where animals stand in aviation law but not where they belong in our hearts.
For animal welfare organisations, this case is a stark reminder that legal systems often lag behind moral progress.
As the demand for pet-friendly travel grows, airlines and lawmakers alike must work towards solutions that recognise pets as living beings, not baggage with a heartbeat.
The only time I have flown with a dog was when Ernst was a pup and under the seat… I cannot imagine the horror of a lost family member
I never even thought about taking my dog on a flight because she´s a big dog and wouldn´t be allowed in the cabin - but to treat dogs as luggage in the jurisdiction is another level of disregard.