In a case of air traffic control negligence, how are damages typically apportioned?

In cases involving air traffic control negligence, damages are typically apportioned based on each party's percentage of negligence. This approach, known as comparative negligence, is grounded in the principle that each party should be responsible for the damages in proportion to their degree of fault in causing the accident.

For example, if an air traffic controller is found to be 70% at fault for a collision and the pilots involved share the remaining 30% of the fault, the damages awarded would be calculated accordingly. This ensures a fair distribution of responsibility and compensation based on the actual contribution to the incident, rather than applying an arbitrary or equal distribution among parties involved.

This method is especially relevant in aviation law, where multiple stakeholders—including pilots, air traffic controllers, and airlines—may share varying degrees of responsibility for an aviation accident. By apportioning damages in line with negligence percentages, the legal system aims to allocate financial responsibility in a manner that reflects the reality of the situation.