Two class actions seeking compensation for travellers hurt by Air Canada strike
Two proposed class-action lawsuits have been filed in the Quebec Superior Court in the wake of the Air Canada strike.
The aim of both lawsuits is to recoup compensation for the harms suffered by Air Canada passengers affected by flight disruptions that occurred around Thursday, Aug.14. The first takes aim at Air Canada. The second targets Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), which represents the airline’s 10,000 flight attendants.
Courts must certify a proposed lawsuit as a class action before it can apply beyond the representative plaintiff named in the suit.
What is alleged in the class actions?
The first action alleges Air Canada failed to re-book passengers within 48 hours and instead misled customers by offering refunds as credits or by re-booking them on much later flights, contrary to federal air passenger protection rules. The proposed class of plaintiffs includes all passengers worldwide whose travel plans were adversely affected.
The second proposed class action, filed by a different Montreal law firm, also names CUPE, claiming the union illegally continued its strike beyond the point it was ordered back to work, causing further grief for affected passengers.
What is in the first proposed class-action claim?
Filed in the Quebec Superior Court, the statement of claim alleges the airline “misled their customers” and provided them with inaccurate information in order to convince them to accept a refund (which was to be given as a credit towards future travel), instead of informing them of the airline’s legal obligations under Canada’s Air Passenger Protection Regulations (APPR).
According to the claim, the representative plaintiff bought a ticket from Montreal to Grenada. It was scheduled to depart on Aug. 17. However, Air Canada issued a 72-hour lockout notice on Wednesday, Aug. 13, notifying customers it would begin cancelling flights on Thursday and Friday, with a complete halt on Saturday, ahead of the anticipated strike.
The plaintiff was notified about her cancelled flight on Saturday, Aug. 16, via email.
“We’re searching for re-booking options on more than 120 carriers for up to three days after your cancelled flight,” reads the Air Canada email, obtained by the law firm. “This may take some time. If you don’t want to wait and you prefer to search options yourself or cancel your booking to receive a refund, please use the button below.”
LPC Avocat Inc. argues in the claim that the email “contain(ed) false and misleading information,” implying that Air Canada was allowed to book people up to three days after a cancelled flight.
What are an airline’s legal obligations according to the claim?
Even when a delay or cancellation is outside the airline’s control, contends the claim, it has a legal obligation to provide the passenger with free re-booking on the next available flight, operated by any carrier on any reasonable route, from the airport where the passenger is located, or at another airport within a reasonable distance.
LPC Avocat Inc. also argues Air Canada did not inform customers that in lieu of booking within 48 hours, as legally required under the APPR, it would need to refund any unused portion of the ticket.
After several hours of not hearing from Air Canada, the plaintiff booked a new flight with American Airlines on Aug. 16. However, shortly thereafter, she received an email from Air Canada saying it had re-booked her on a Caribbean Airlines flight leaving on Wednesday, Aug. 20, with multiple stopovers, and arriving in Grenada on Aug. 21.
The claim argues Air Canada contravened the APPR by rebooking her 86 hours after her cancelled flight, rather than the legally required 48. And it also failed to reserve a ticket on the next available flight operated by any carrier. (The claim argues there were flights available with other airlines on Aug. 17, 18 and 19.)
Who can apply to receive compensation from the first lawsuit?
The proposed class members include any person around the world whose travel plans since Aug. 14, 2025, were affected by the Air Canada strike and were not provided a reservation for the “next available flight” or “alternate travel arrangements” as required by law.
To stay informed about developments in the case, the firm has provided a sign-up page .
What is the second proposed class action about?
A second lawsuit, filed by Lambert Avocats , targets CUPE. It alleges the union illegally continued its strike after the Canada Industrial Relations Board ordered the attendants back to work.
It argues CUPE’s defiance prolonged the shutdown and forced passengers to absorb extra costs for hotel rooms, meals during unexpected layovers and replacement flights.
The claimant, who had booked a family holiday in Cancún, said the trip collapsed when crews stayed off the job despite the federal order.
The union has not yet filed a defence to the claim.
Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark nationalpost.com and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.