MH17之后，什么變了？

????最新一起馬航墜機事件發生后，人們不斷地對馬航的財務能力、法律責任以及遇難者家屬的權利提出了很多問題。

????拋開財務問題暫且不談，MH370和MH17這兩起事故之間有一些顯著差異。

????MH370仍是一個謎（而且可能在很長一段時間內都是如此）。從保險賠償的角度而言，這也是不同尋常的一起事故，因為在缺乏確鑿證據的情況下，很難以過失和追責提起訴訟。這可能成為史上賠償最少的事故之一。

????但是，MH17墜機事故完全不一樣。問題不在于是否會提出索賠，而是何時何地提出索賠，將涉及多少名被告。現在已有一大批潛在被告，從馬來西亞航空公司（在飛機失事的案例中航空公司肯定是被告）一直到個別政府。還記得泛美航空103航班嗎？最后利比亞政府向遇難者家屬支付了巨額賠償金。但考慮到烏克蘭目前的形勢，此次事故的法律程序可能會變得非常混亂和復雜。

????如果遇難者的家屬和政府能夠證明俄羅斯為烏克蘭分裂分子提供了肇事武器（據稱客機是被烏克蘭分裂分子擊落），最終的判決可能會對俄羅斯政府不利（至少在民事訴訟案件中會是這樣）。這可能需要幾年的時間，而且幾乎可以肯定的是，俄羅斯要么上訴，要么干脆無視審判結果。如果出現這種情況，依據先例，至少相關方會試圖沒收俄羅斯在世界各國的資產。那么哪個國家可能會首先提起訴訟呢？荷蘭。可能會出現在沒收目標清單上的資產包括俄羅斯航空公司停靠在國外機場的飛機以及停泊在外國港口的俄羅斯游輪。

????在短期內，有關方面將再次依據蒙特利爾公約向遇難者家屬進行賠償。該公約于1999年簽訂，規定每位遇難者的賠償數額為174,000美元，而且賠償金支付不受事故原因（包括戰爭或恐怖主義）的限制。（此次賠償金額可能高達4900萬美元，而且可能由馬來西亞航空的保險公司支付。）

????但索賠人肯定會要求更多賠償。在這種情況下，馬來西亞航空公司本身肯定也會提起索賠。

????除了保險問題之外，此次事故還將產生其他直接影響。例如，航空業很快會更改飛機航線，以避免經過任何沖突區域。這是一項復雜的舉措，因為繞航200-300英里（或更多）將帶來大量的燃料成本和運營挑戰。部分長途直達航班現在可能需要在中途著陸加油。在這個過程中，航班成本將上漲，乘務人員可能需要重新配置，而且由此產生的航班延誤可能會導致航班之間無法進行直連。鑒于這些航行路線的變化，機票費用中到時可能會增加“戰爭風險”或“沖突區域”燃油附加費，屆時您也不用太驚訝。

????從歷史上來看，商業航空公司的飛機經常在沖突地區上空飛行。當你在讀這篇文章時，至少有20架美國商業飛機正飛越古巴上空。飛往約旦的航班是由以色列空中交通管制處理。商業航班仍在敘利亞、索馬里、伊拉克北部等地區上空飛行。

????In the wake of the latest disaster involving Malaysia Airlines, more and more questions are being asked about the financial viability of the airline, as well as the legal fallout and the rights of victims’ families.

????But financial questions aside, there are distinct differences between MH 370 and MH 17.

????MH 370 remains a mystery (and may remain so for quite some time). It’s also one of the more unusual crashes from an insurance payout perspective because it’s very difficult to litigate negligence and liability in the absence of any hard evidence. It may turn out to be one of the least expensive cases in history.

????MH17, however, is very different. The issue won’t be whether claims will be filed, but when, where and how many defendants will be named. Already there’s a huge shopping list of defendants, ranging from the airline (always named in cases relating to a plane crash) to individual governments. Remember Pan Am 103? In the end the Libyan government paid large settlements to the families. But given the current situation in the Ukraine, the legal process here could get very messy and very complicated very quickly.

????It could ultimately end — at least in the civil cases filed — with a judgment issued against the Russian government, if families and governments can prove the country armed the separatist rebels allegedly responsible for the crash. That would likely take years, and almost certainly, Russia would either appeal, or simply ignore the judgment. If that happens, there’s precedent to expect at least an attempt by those parties to seize Russian assets in various countries around the world. First country expected to file lawsuit? The Netherlands. The assets likely to be on the target list: Aeroflot planes on the ground in foreign airports, and Russian cruise ships in foreign ports.

????In the short term, the Montreal convention protocols for awarding victims’ families payment will again be applied. The 1999 agreement limits claimants to about $174,000 per death, and will be paid regardless of the cause of the crash, including war or terrorism. (This payment could be as high as $49 million, and would come from Malaysia Airlines’ insurers.)

????But claimants will most certainly seek more damages. And in this case, one of the claimants will most certainly be Malaysia Airlines itself.

????Insurance issues aside, there are other immediate ramifications. For one, the airline industry will move quickly to reroute their planes over any area of conflict. This is a complicated move, because a 200-300 mile diversion (or more) means significant fuel costs and operational challenges. Some long haul nonstop flights may now have to land for refueling. In the process, the cost of the flights goes up, crews may have to be repositioned, and flight schedules may not offer connectivity because of the delays. Don’t be surprised to see a “war-risk” or “conflict” fuel surcharge added to the cost of those tickets because of these navigational changes.

????Historically, commercial airlines have long flown over conflicted areas. As you are reading this, at least 20 U.S. commercial airplanes are overflying Cuba. Airlines flying to Jordan are handled on approach by Israeli air traffic control. Commercial airlines overfly Syria, Somalia, Northern Iraq, to name a few.