In late 2023, Air Canada faced a major lawsuit over a gold heist that happened in Toronto, as the airline was accused of acting recklessly. Well, a judge has now ruled, and I’d say the folks at Air Canada are probably pretty happy.
In this post:
Brink’s sued Air Canada over Toronto Airport theft
In April 2023, one of the biggest heists in Canadian history happened at Toronto Pearson Airport (YYZ). An Air Canada flight from Zurich was carrying a shipment worth around $15 million USD, which was supposed to be handed over to security firm Brink’s. However, all of the belongings, which included over 400kg of gold bars plus cash, ended up being stolen shortly after arriving at an airport facility.
In April 2024, more details emerged about what happened, and arrests were made. This was a remarkably simple plot. After the flight arrived, the container with the valuables was moved from the aircraft to an Air Canada warehouse at the airport. Around two hours later, a truck driver appeared with a waybill to pick up the shipment, which gave him access to the warehouse.
As it later turned out, this was actually the duplicate of a waybill for a shipment of seafood, which had been picked up a day earlier. However, it was printed using an Air Canada printer.
The container with the valuables was loaded onto a truck, and video recordings showed the truck traveling down the highway, before eventually disappearing from sight in a rural area. The following morning, a Brink’s armored truck arrived at the cargo facility to pick up the shipment, with the actual waybill. That’s when police were called, since the shipment was missing.
Brink’s ended up suing Air Canada over the incident, arguing that Air Canada acted negligently, and that the theft could have been prevented if the airline properly followed security guidelines, and verified the authenticity of the waybill.
Air Canada has to pay Brink’s only $13K over incident
There’s now an interesting update to this case. While Brink’s tried to hold Air Canada fully liable for the theft, a federal court has ruled that Air Canada’s liability in this incident is limited to around $13,000 USD. The reason?
Well, the Montreal Convention limits the responsibility of airlines for the loss of baggage or cargo, unless specific criteria are met. The judge ruled that Brink’s did not meet these criteria, and that the company failed to make a “special declaration of interest” in the shipment, or pay an additional fee for the shipment to be secured more carefully.
Because of this, Air Canada’s liability is limited to 9,988 Special Drawing Rights, which is roughly equivalent to $13,000 USD. I’d say that’s a pretty favorable outcome for Air Canada, as the airline will be paying less than 0.1% of the amount that was being requested.
On the one hand, it seems kind of wild that a gold shipment is essentially treated the same way as lost luggage for the purposes of liability. At the same time, was Brink’s not paying extra for this shipment to be more closely monitored, compared to other shipments? If so, then I imagine something has been learned from this incident…
Bottom line
Air Canada was sued by Brink’s for $15 million USD over a heist that happened in April 2023 at Toronto Pearson Airport. While Brink’s was hoping to recover the entire value of the shipment, a court ruled that Air Canada’s liability was limited to what’s specified in the Montreal Convention, and that’s around $13,000 USD. That’s because the company failed to make a “special declaration of interest” in the shipment, or pay an additional fee for the shipment to be secured more carefully.
What do you make of this Brink’s lawsuit against Air Canada?
That is why there are codes like PER, HUM, VAL that indicated special treatment for which u have to pay and includes special treatment based on code. U don’t pay and declare , tough luck. They have Warsaw Convention for a reason.
$15 Million in gold bars, and Brinks takes its sweet time deciding to pick up the next day. Would it have killed them to have the pickup team ready and waiting for immediate pickup after it was cleared?! AC is a crap airline and clearly at fault, but Brinks' lackadaisical approach is beyond staggering. These two companies deserve each other.
I guess they should have paid the extra to ship it via AC Secure
"All cargo is precious, but some high-value items require unique handling. AC Secure ensures the safe and secure transportation of specific commodities including goods with a declared value of CAD/USD $1,000 per kilogram or more"
A 400-kg shipment that has a volume of (just the gold) less than 6 gallons is worth US$15M. And Brinks scheduled a pick up for THE NEXT MORNING??? Guilty!!!
Every cargo contract I've signed and AWB I've issued has very clear statements waiving liability beyond Montreal limits. Most even cite gold and other bullion as specific exemptions. If you signed a contract to ship valuable cargo and didn't specify excess value, you deserve what's coming to you for negligence. Plenty of shippers have paid millions of dollars in insurance and security costs to move this kind of stuff around the world, so trying to...
Every cargo contract I've signed and AWB I've issued has very clear statements waiving liability beyond Montreal limits. Most even cite gold and other bullion as specific exemptions. If you signed a contract to ship valuable cargo and didn't specify excess value, you deserve what's coming to you for negligence. Plenty of shippers have paid millions of dollars in insurance and security costs to move this kind of stuff around the world, so trying to do this on the cheap and hope for the best will come back and bite you eventually.
"...and I’d say Air Canada got off kind of easy."
From your own posting it sounds like the judge followed the law to the letter by finding that Brinks failed to follow proper shipping guidelines and requirements for such a valuable shipment. AC didn't get off kind of easy - they were punished in accordance with the specific laws applicable and, apparently, to the full extent allowed. It's an interesting case, for sure, but your...
"...and I’d say Air Canada got off kind of easy."
From your own posting it sounds like the judge followed the law to the letter by finding that Brinks failed to follow proper shipping guidelines and requirements for such a valuable shipment. AC didn't get off kind of easy - they were punished in accordance with the specific laws applicable and, apparently, to the full extent allowed. It's an interesting case, for sure, but your phrasing indicates you think the judge went easy on AC.
@ DCAWABN -- Totally fair, and that wasn't my intention. Let me update the post and rephrase.
Sounds like the problem is the law itself that is design to let companies get off easy