How he berated airline lawyer

MR JUSTICE PETER SMITH (PS): Right, Mr Turner, here is a question for you. What happened to the luggage? AIRLINE BARRISTER JON TURNER

QC (JT): My Lord … we are not dealing with that as parties in these proceedings.

PS: I am asking you: what has happened to the luggage?

JT: My Lord … we are not getting involved because we trust that that will be dealt with expeditiously, in the ordinary course of events.

PS: In that case, do you want me to order your chief executive to appear before me?

JT: I do not wish your Lordship to do that; and I would say, if your Lordship will permit me to develop my submissions, that that would be an inappropriate mixture of a personal dispute …

PS: What is inappropriate is the continued failure of your clients to explain a simple question, namely, what happened to the luggage? It has been two weeks since that happened now. Or are you saying that if I had a piece of luggage that was just lost, that would lead me to recuse myself from the case?

JT: Our position, my Lord, is that where your Lordship initiates a personal dispute with British Airways …

PS: I didn’t initiate a personal dispute. BA’s associated company retained my luggage. It is not my fault that happened. I am the victim.

PS: As far as I am concerned, the key fact in this case is: what happened to the luggage; and your clients know what happened to the luggage and they are not telling me. And your solicitors and you are deliberately not asking …

PS: If there is a perfectly understandable operational reason as to why the whole of the flight’s luggage was left behind in Florence – note, the whole of the flight, not just mine – if it was for perfectly reasonable operational reasons, then I will accept that.

PS: BA as a group … clearly know what happened to the luggage, because, as I said in my original email, they cannot have accidentally left the whole of the flight’s luggage off the plane, can they? I mean, I am intrigued.