• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.109-134
• /
• 2014

Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation of assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights (Regulation No 261/2004) provides extra protection to air passengers in circumstances of denied boarding, cancellation and long-delay. The Regulation intends to provide a high level of protection to air passengers by imposing obligations on air carriers and, at the same time, offering extensive rights to air passengers. If denied boarding, cancellation and long-delay are caused by reasons other than extraordinary circumstances, passengers are entitled for compensation under Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004. In Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia-Linee Aeree Italiane SpA(Case C-549/07, [2008] ECR I-11061), the Court did, however, emphasize that this does not mean that it is never possible for technical problems to constitute extraordinary circumstances. It cited specific examples of where: an aircraft manufacturer or competent authority revealed that there was a hidden manufacturing defect on an aircraft which impacts on safety; or damage was caused to an aircraft as a result of an act of sabotage or terrorism. Such events are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and is beyond the actual control of that carrier on account of its nature or origin. One further point arising out of the court's decision is worth mentioning. It is not just necessary to satisfy the extraordinary circumstances test for the airline to be excused from paying compensation. It must also show that the circumstances could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. It is clear from the language of the Court's decision that this is a tough test to meet: the airline will have to establish that, even if it had deployed all its resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposal, it would clearly not have been able - unless it had made intolerable sacrifices in the light of the capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time - to prevent the extraordinary circumstances with which it was confronted from leading to the cancellation of the flight.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.61-70
• /
• 2005

Purpose: Uterine cervix cancer is one of the most prevalent women cancer in Korea. We analysed published papers in Korea with comparing Patterns of Care Study (PCS) articles of United States and Japan for the purpose of developing and processing Korean PCS. Materials and Methods: We searched PCS related foreign-produced papers in the PCS homepage (212 articles and abstracts) and from the Pub Med to find Structure and Process of the PCS. To compare their study with Korean papers, we used the internet site 'Korean Pub Med' to search 99 articles regarding uterine cervix cancer and radiation therapy. We analysed Korean paper by comparing them with selected PCS papers regarding Structure, Process and Outcome and compared their items between the period of before 1980's and 1990's. Results: Evaluable papers were 28 from United States, 10 from the Japan and 73 from the Korea which treated cervix PCS items. PCS papers for United States and Japan commonly stratified into $3\~4$ categories on the bases of the scales characteristics of the facilities, numbers of the patients, doctors, Researchers restricted eligible patients strictly. For the process of the study, they analysed factors regarding pretreatment staging in chronological order, treatment related factors, factors in addition to FIGO staging and treatment machine. Papers in United States dealt with racial characteristics, socioeconomic characteristics of the patients, tumor size (6), and bilaterality of parametrial or pelvic side wail invasion (5), whereas papers from Japan treated of the tumor markers. The common trend in the process of staging work-up was decreased use of lymphangiogram, barium enema and increased use of CT and MRI over the times. The recent subject from the Korean papers dealt with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (9 papers), treatment duration (4), tumor markers (B) and unconventional fractionation. Conclusion: By comparing papers among 3 nations, we collected items for Korean uterine cervix cancer PCS. By consensus meeting and close communication, survey items for cervix cancer PCS were developed to measure structure, process and outcome of the radiation treatment of the cervix cancer. Subsequent future research will focus on the use of brachytherapy and its impact on outcome including complications. These finding and future PCS studies will direct the development of educational programs aimed at correcting identified deficits in care.