08 May 2025, Singapore - Traveller Jake Moffatt used Air Canada’s chatbot on its website to find discounted bereavement fares.

The chatbot gave inaccurate advice, including the option for a partial refund within 90 days after the flight.

But it's message hyperlinked the words “bereavement fare” to a page that stated claims cannot be made for used tickets. 

(Bereavement fares are discounted flight fares offered by airlines to help passengers reach their loved ones in times of mourning, said Doug Luftman, a former chief legal officer.) 

Moffatt did not click on the hyperlink. He bought tickets based on the chatbot’s advice, and made a claim within six days.

However, Air Canada’s staff denied Moffatt’s request. The staff said the chatbot used “misleading words”, but also hyperlinked to a page that showed a different policy.

Moffatt sued for the fare difference. He won, one year later. 

Why should travellers learn about this case? Because of a stunning argument by Air Canada.

Common Sense Prevailed 

The case caught global attention, when Air Canada argued that the chatbot was a "separate legal entity that is responsible for its own actions".

Not so, said Christopher Rivers, who decided on the outcome of the case. He is a vice chair of the Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia.

(The Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia is "part of the British Columbia public justice system" and "Canada’s first online tribunal".)

Three points stood out in Rivers' decision:

• Air Canada did not explain why it believed it cannot be held liable for information provided by any of its representatives, including a chatbot.

• It did not explain why one webpage was more trustworthy than its chatbot. 

• It did not provide a "copy of the relevant portion of the tariff" to prove it is not liable due to attached terms or conditions.

Rivers wrote that it was Air Canada's responsibility to ensure “representations are accurate and not misleading”, whether on a static page or a chatbot.