MH17之后，什么变了？

    最新一起马航坠机事件发生后，人们不断地对马航的财务能力、法律责任以及遇难者家属的权利提出了很多问题。

    抛开财务问题暂且不谈，MH370和MH17这两起事故之间有一些显著差异。

    MH370仍是一个谜（而且可能在很长一段时间内都是如此）。从保险赔偿的角度而言，这也是不同寻常的一起事故，因为在缺乏确凿证据的情况下，很难以过失和追责提起诉讼。这可能成为史上赔偿最少的事故之一。

    但是，MH17坠机事故完全不一样。问题不在于是否会提出索赔，而是何时何地提出索赔，将涉及多少名被告。现在已有一大批潜在被告，从马来西亚航空公司（在飞机失事的案例中航空公司肯定是被告）一直到个别政府。还记得泛美航空103航班吗？最后利比亚政府向遇难者家属支付了巨额赔偿金。但考虑到乌克兰目前的形势，此次事故的法律程序可能会变得非常混乱和复杂。

    如果遇难者的家属和政府能够证明俄罗斯为乌克兰分裂分子提供了肇事武器（据称客机是被乌克兰分裂分子击落），最终的判决可能会对俄罗斯政府不利（至少在民事诉讼案件中会是这样）。这可能需要几年的时间，而且几乎可以肯定的是，俄罗斯要么上诉，要么干脆无视审判结果。如果出现这种情况，依据先例，至少相关方会试图没收俄罗斯在世界各国的资产。那么哪个国家可能会首先提起诉讼呢？荷兰。可能会出现在没收目标清单上的资产包括俄罗斯航空公司停靠在国外机场的飞机以及停泊在外国港口的俄罗斯游轮。

    在短期内，有关方面将再次依据蒙特利尔公约向遇难者家属进行赔偿。该公约于1999年签订，规定每位遇难者的赔偿数额为174,000美元，而且赔偿金支付不受事故原因（包括战争或恐怖主义）的限制。（此次赔偿金额可能高达4900万美元，而且可能由马来西亚航空的保险公司支付。）

    但索赔人肯定会要求更多赔偿。在这种情况下，马来西亚航空公司本身肯定也会提起索赔。

    除了保险问题之外，此次事故还将产生其他直接影响。例如，航空业很快会更改飞机航线，以避免经过任何冲突区域。这是一项复杂的举措，因为绕航200-300英里（或更多）将带来大量的燃料成本和运营挑战。部分长途直达航班现在可能需要在中途着陆加油。在这个过程中，航班成本将上涨，乘务人员可能需要重新配置，而且由此产生的航班延误可能会导致航班之间无法进行直连。鉴于这些航行路线的变化，机票费用中到时可能会增加“战争风险”或“冲突区域”燃油附加费，届时您也不用太惊讶。

    从历史上来看，商业航空公司的飞机经常在冲突地区上空飞行。当你在读这篇文章时，至少有20架美国商业飞机正飞越古巴上空。飞往约旦的航班是由以色列空中交通管制处理。商业航班仍在叙利亚、索马里、伊拉克北部等地区上空飞行。

    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.