Standard Ground Handling Agreement 2013 Iata

The amended clause 7.3 and the new clause 7.4 give the handler the right to suspend services if the airline does not require an immediate advance or cash payment in the event of insolvency. Given the historical liquidity problems faced by some airlines, it is perhaps surprising that these clauses have not yet been included in the SGHA. This does not mean that the resolution of the companies will be nothing but unsecured creditors for unpaid bills. Under current SGHA legislation, cash advances or advances may violate applicable local insolvency legislation. 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). SGHA 2018 does not deal entirely with data protection, although the definition of eTickets tickets has been expanded. The initial clause 5.10 of SGHA 2013, which states that “contracting parties agree to comply with all applicable data protection laws when providing services,” has been removed. 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).

This new clause will protect assistance companies if an airline attempts to circumvent an unfavourable contract and merely include its requirements “in the source.” Some felt that the wording of the 2013 edition simply meant that a claim for damages from the carrier would be invalidated, unless the recipient had asserted a right within 14/21 days. Others argued that the carrier itself should seek compensation within those time frames. 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. In 2013, the IATA Ground Support Council authorized the use of yellow pages for the publication of pages of text amending Appendix B in the years between the new versions of the SGHA. SGHA 2018 Appendix B has now fully added the yellow pages to paragraph 8. In the future, this will provide some flexibility in the basic model.

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. IATA Standard Ground Handling, STANDARD GROUND HANDLING AGREEMENT, IATA Standard Ground Handling Agreement, Standard, Possible Modification of Artikel 8, IATA, Ground Handling, STANDARD GROUND HANDLING, International Air Transport Association, IATA Standard Ground Handling Agreement – Service Level Agreements, The Standard Ground Handling Agreement SGHA, Ground Operations Safety Manual IATA International Air Transport … The Ground Operations Security Manual … The AG Airside GOSM sets the GA`s safety standards for stopover assistance for G Ps at …

Comments are closed.