On 16 October 2025, the European Court of Justice officially stated that pets can be handled as baggage when taken aboard a flight. The ECJ particularly handled the case of a dog lost during a flight from Buenos Aires to Barcelona in 2019.
It is not rare for airplane passengers to make the voyage with their pet. While small species can generally be kept inside the cabin, larger animals tend to travel inside the plane’s cargo space. Whether or not they are to be considered as normal baggage depends on who’s asked.
The matter resurfaced recently as the European Court of Justice was asked to rule on the case of a dog lost during an Iberia flight between Buenos Aires in Argentina and Barcelona in Spain, in October 2019. The dog, called Mona, had to be placed in a pet carrier inside the cargo hold due to its size, yet while being carried to the plane, she managed to escape. While airport workers chased the dog with three vans in order to try and recover the pet, Mona was never seen again.
Following her loss, the pet’s owner was inconsolable and claimed compensation from Iberia in the amount of €5,000 for the non-material damage suffered following the loss of her dog. Yet while the Spanish airline accepts its liability and the entitlement to compensation, it argued that the amount should not exceed that of the limit for checked baggage, thus amounting to just €1,578.82.
How to define baggage?
The case was brought before a Spanish court, which decided to refer the question to the Court of Justice. The main question asked was to define the concept of ‘baggage’ stipulated by the so-called Montreal Convention, to know if that term excluded pets travelling with passengers or not.
On 16 October 2025, the ECJ ruled that pets are indeed to be considered as baggage.
#ECJHighlights | 16/10
— EU Court of Justice (@EUCourtPress) October 10, 2025
⚖️ (J): #AirTransport – dog lost in transit: is it “baggage”? 🇪🇸 (C-218/24)
⚖️ (J): Plane struck by lightning & passenger compensation 🇩🇪 (C-399/24)
⚖️ (J): #Sanctions – listing over Russia-Ukraine context 🇫🇷 (C-805/24 P) pic.twitter.com/CzIVL79Pyd
“According to the Montreal Convention, other than carriage of cargo, aircraft perform international carriage of persons and baggage. The concept of ‘persons’ corresponds to that of ‘passengers’, with the result that a pet cannot be considered to be a ‘passenger’. Consequently, for the purposes of air travel, a pet falls within the concept of ‘baggage’ and the compensation for the damage resulting from the loss of a pet is subject to the liability rules for baggage”, the ruling summary reads.
However, a special declaration of interest in delivery at destination can be filled in by the passenger before boarding the plane, allowing them to increase the liability limit for non-material damage as well as material damage. Approval by the air carrier is mandatory in that case, and according to the European Court of Justice, the payment of a supplementary fee may be required. The passenger travelling with Mona had not entered such a declaration and should thus not receive any extra compensation.
“The fact that the protection of animal welfare is an objective of general interest recognised by the European Union does not prevent animals from being transported as ‘baggage’ and from being regarded as such for the purposes of the liability resulting from the loss of an animal, upon the condition that full regard is paid to animal welfare requirements while they are transported”, the ruling concludes.
Carlos Villacorta Salis, lawyer of Mona’s owner, told AFP that he was disappointed by the ruling. He also called the declaration of interest a false argument, saying no airline would be inclined to approve such a document.
As the ruling by the ECJ is only advisory in this case, the Spanish court is expected to make a final ruling handling the compensation claim soon.
