Standard Ground Handling Agreement Iata

A carrier`s insolvency can also have greater consequences. The British CAA suspended Monarch Airlines` AOC when it went bankrupt in October 2017 and forced it to cease operations with immediate effect. They no longer needed stopover assistance services. However, in practice, it is difficult to imagine, unless an airline has sufficient resources (for example. B of ground support personnel and equipment) who are ready to follow in the footsteps of a well-established operator. Most airlines are thinner and thinner. SGHA 2018 has highlighted broader audit rights under Clause 5.9 to allow other carriers within an IATA audit pool to review the handling company in favour of this pool. Currently, there are 37 airlines within the ISAGO Audit Pool, which can benefit from joint audit reports for the same handler at a given airport. Many of these changes are only editorial, SGHA Amendment 2013. However, some changes are significant and focus on operational practices, improved standards, training, insolvency, claims and compliance in general. We briefly reviewed the major changes to the main agreement and Schedule B and looked at what they might mean to users. The 38th edition of the IATA Airport Handling Manual (AHM) is now live. The AHM contains the most recent iteration of the SGHA, which reflects the evolution of aviation and more broadly, and which results from the consultation and contribution of airlines, handling companies and other players in the sector.

It goes without saying that airlines have their own ground operating manuals, other service provider guidelines, codes of conduct, approach policies, customer service (e.g.B. customer charter), style and even brand. Handling companies are often the face of an airline in an airport. Airlines must provide sufficient information to enable assistance companies to perform the processing properly (new point 5.1). This new clause will protect assistance companies if an airline attempts to circumvent an unfavourable contract and merely include its requirements “in the source.” IATA has explicitly identified its resolutions and standard practices as benchmarks for the provision of services to businesses and has written them down in the new paragraphs 5.3 (a) and (b). Within SGHA 2013, there was some confusion about the deadline for obtaining damages from a carrier. The confusion was caused by the following sentence: “Any claim must be filed within the time frame set out in section 31.2 of the 1999 Montreal Convention.” Section 31.2 sets the deadlines for filing claims of persons authorized for delivery for damaged and late shipments, 14 and 21 days respectively.

Dette indlæg blev udgivet i Ikke kategoriseret. Bogmærk permalinket.