AIFoPa-2024-0001
Date of Record: 14 Feb 2024
2 min read
In Effect, a Separate Legal Entity
Air Canada’s chatbot invented a bereavement fare policy and a passenger relied on it. In tribunal, the airline argued it was not liable for what the chatbot said.
Jake Moffatt’s grandmother died. He needed to fly. He asked Air Canada’s chatbot about bereavement fares.
The chatbot told him he could buy a full-price ticket and apply for a retroactive bereavement discount within ninety days. He bought the ticket. He applied. Air Canada denied the application. Its policy did not allow retroactive claims.
Moffatt took the matter to British Columbia’s Civil Resolution Tribunal. It is a public body that decides small claims online.
Air Canada argued that it could not be held liable for information given by its agents, servants or representatives. That included the chatbot. It did not explain why.
Tribunal Member Christopher Rivers summarised the position. In effect, he wrote, Air Canada suggested the chatbot was “a separate legal entity that is responsible for its own actions.” He called this “a remarkable submission.”
He found that the chatbot was simply part of Air Canada’s website. Air Canada was responsible for its website. It was ordered to pay Moffatt C$812.02, most of it the difference between the two fares.
Shortly after the ruling, the chatbot was no longer on Air Canada’s website. The airline did not say whether it had left voluntarily.