Transport Service Bias Against People with Limited Mobility

Mar 26, 2026 Benn-Ibler Rechtsanwälte

The Austrian Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof, hereinafter OGH) has determined that an airline engages in discriminatory practices regarding the transportation of individuals who use wheelchairs if the person affected is required to wait 45 minutes to receive a wheelchair upon landing.

In the initial proceedings, the claimant had pursued damages against the defendant airline, alleging both direct and indirect discrimination in multiple areas related to the flight booking process and its subsequent operation.

Discrimination throughout the entire trip: From booking to arrival

The claimant asserted that the defendant engaged in discriminatory practices during the booking process concerning the allocation of a seat for her accompanying person on the aircraft. The alleged discrimination related to the requirement that she check in at the counter to ensure the wheelchair would be returned to her upon arrival, as well as to the delayed delivery of the wheelchair after landing. The claimant contended that these procedures resulted in significant additional effort during both booking and check-in. Furthermore, challenges arose in securing adjacent seating for the accompanying person, as no two seats together were available online at the time of booking. Nevertheless, the defendant ultimately addressed the seating concern at the airport, enabling the claimant and her companion to be seated together.

The Supreme Court reviewed the individual allegations and issued a decision that diverged from the findings of the lower courts:

Discrimination: The issue pertains solely to the storage of the wheelchair

According to Section 5(2) of the Disability Equality Act, indirect discrimination arises when seemingly neutral provisions, criteria, procedures, or organisational structures place persons with disabilities at a specific disadvantage compared to others. However, such measures are not considered discriminatory if they are objectively justified by a legitimate aim and the means used to achieve that aim are both appropriate and necessary.

It is only in connection with the transport or stowage of the wheelchair that the defendant’s conduct has disadvantaged the claimant (without objective justification) in a particular way compared to other persons, and therefore at least indirect discrimination must be affirmed.

OGH Ob 128/25m (21 January 2026)