Air Canada argues it is not liable for what its chatbot said; the tribunal rejects this, British Columbia, 14 February 2024
The typed evidence object. This is the working store; the case page is the reader's form.
| Layer / facet | Value | Type | Sources | Conf. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mandate: principal | Air Canada | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
| Mandate: objective | Answer customer questions on the airline's website | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
| Actor | The chatbot on Air Canada's website | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
| Inputs | A customer's question about bereavement fares after a family death | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
| Decision | The chatbot stated that a reduced bereavement fare could be claimed after travel, within 90 days of the date the ticket was issued, contradicting the airline's own policy page | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
| Envelope | The decision records no limit on what the chatbot could assert; Air Canada pointed out that the chatbot linked to its bereavement policy page, and did not explain why the webpage should be trusted over the chatbot | interpretation | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | medium |
| Action | A statement the customer relied on | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
| Outcome | State: harm (small). The customer was refused the retroactive discount; the tribunal ordered Air Canada to pay CAD 812.02 (CAD 650.88 damages, CAD 36.14 pre-judgment interest, CAD 125 tribunal fees). As of 2024. | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
| Evidence: event | Tribunal record of the exchange | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
| Evidence: actor | Air Canada argued it could not be held liable for information provided by one of its agents, servants, or representatives, including a chatbot; the tribunal said this in effect suggested the chatbot was a separate legal entity, called it a remarkable submission, and rejected it | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
| Recovery: technical | None before reliance: the record shows no correction before the customer booked both flights relying on the chatbot's answer (11 and 16 November 2022). Afterwards, in February 2023, an Air Canada representative admitted the chatbot had provided "misleading words" and said Air Canada had noted the issue so it could update the chatbot; the decision does not say whether it was updated. After the ruling, Business Standard reported that Air Canada's chatbot support appeared to be disabled on its website. | interpretation | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609); Explained: Why Air Canada had to refund a customer misled by a chatbot | high |
| Recovery: accountability | Negligent misrepresentation found against the airline; the principal is responsible for all information on its website, however generated | fact | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | high |
Controls
| Status | Control | Canonical |
|---|---|---|
| absent | The record shows no check of the chatbot's policy answers against the airline's policy page before they reached the customer; the tribunal found Air Canada did not take reasonable care to ensure its chatbot was accurate, and Air Canada gave no information about the nature of its chatbot | C-D1 Pre-execution validation |
Inference
inference A boundary case: the chatbot only gave information, and the customer booked the flights. It is in the Register for the tribunal's answer to the airline's argument that it could not be held liable for what its chatbot said: the airline is responsible for all the information on its website, whether it comes from a static page or a chatbot. The ruling is a small-claims decision of British Columbia's Civil Resolution Tribunal. The record does not show how the chatbot worked or why it gave a wrong answer.
Sources
| ID | Record | Type | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| BCCRT | Moffatt v. Air Canada, 2024 BCCRT 149 (Civil Resolution Tribunal of British Columbia, File SC-2023-005609) | court primary record | decisions.civilresolutionbc.ca ↗ checked 2026-10-13 |
| BUSINESS-STANDARD | Explained: Why Air Canada had to refund a customer misled by a chatbot | press pointer secondary: press report | business-standard.com ↗ checked 2026-10-20 |