This article is written by the iPleaders team and reviewed by Adv Shashank Singh. He is specialised in aviation law with extensive experience advising on aircraft leasing, MRO agreements, and cross-border aviation contracts. He practices before the Supreme Court of India, Delhi High Court, and key tribunals, combining expertise in complex commercial disputes, white-collar crime, IBC and international arbitration with a strong focus on regulatory clarity and strategic outcomes.       

Beginning

For a long time, private planes have been the go-to travel choice for wealthy individuals. This has increased ever since the pandemic hit, in India and across the globe. With this, there has been a significant increase in private jet accidents as well.   

Now these accidents are quite different from commercial planes, as these tragedies don’t make headlines. This triggers a storm of legal, financial and reputational battles. Several questions come up: Who is the owner? Who is liable? Will insurers pay up? And what happens to the vast estate suddenly left behind? 

Just like the plane crash of Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin, which resulted in his death in August 2023. He left behind his Embraer Legacy 600. This sparked a speculation of foul play, sabotage, pilot error and technical error.

On the outside, private aviation may look glamorous, but beneath that sheen lie serious gaps in laws and regulations.  

This compels us to imagine how courtrooms examine these types of cases. Moreover, a major question that arises here is, when the rich fall from the sky, do law and justice fall with them?

Private planes vs commercial airlines: how legal frameworks differ

Both do not differ on the surface. Both involve a licensed pilot, passengers and an airworthy plane. But what differs in the framework on which they work. 

Unlike commercial flights, private planes operate under far less scrutiny. Private jets usually operate under the Non-Scheduled Operator Permits (NSOPs) in India. This design gives flexibility to private operators, which is often misused, but they can choose their pilot, crew and set operational protocols. 

Yes, private planes have a regulatory eye of the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), but the level of oversight is nowhere near that of commercial flights. Commercial flights have to go through safety audits, compliance reviews and standard operating procedures. Private planes, on the other hand, work on loose rules, few inspections and diluted accountability.  

This picture is not different on a global level. There are different frameworks that create a dense web of complications, like the Montreal Convention, DGCA protocols and ICAO norms, for commercial flights. But this web is far from the private planes. The NSOPs leave room for flexibility, which also dilutes accountability.

This is a huge challenge for the lawyers, insurers and the victim’s family. Which court has the jurisdiction? Compensation claims can be filed under which law? How will the damages be calculated? These are not abstract questions, but determine if the victim’s family gets fair compensation or stays stuck under a web of a long-running lawsuit.   

Passengers are not treated as  consumers

Which legislation helps when a commercial plane goes down?

The families of these passengers can file a lawsuit under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. This is not the same for private aviation. The reason is basically because most of the passengers of private planes are either:

• Owners
• Company directors
• Family members, or
• Guests 

This creates issues for the lawyers and family members of these victims. How?

Since these passengers are not ‘regular ticket holders’, they cannot go to consumer courts. Their legal remedies shift to contract law, tort claims and insurance litigation, and this makes the compensation process technical, expensive and very long.

Contractual ambiguity and waivers

In private aviation, the stakes of forms and waivers that are often signed are the foundation of a legal maze. These charter agreements are not easy. The clauses in these documents quietly shape what happens if something goes wrong.

You will find clauses like, liability limitation clause, the waiver clause and the jurisdiction clause, which very conveniently push the dispute into faraway or foreign arbitration forums like New York or Singapore. Litigation gets more challenging because of other exclusion clauses.  

For the victim’s family, this creates an uphill battle. The legal battle is not shaped as per any straightforward legal rights but on the basis of the right waived when the agreement was signed. 

Where the compensation claims are guided by the statutory safety provision and international guidelines, the outcome depends much on the contract. Which means, when the accident happens, the question is not about negligence or law, but about what was buried in the fine-printed agreements that passengers often sign without even understanding them completely. 

Liability maze: Who can be sued after a private plane crash?

When a commercial plane comes down, it is easy to trace the liability. Things are quite strict and clear here. But private planes? Things get complicated quickly when it comes to determining the liability.

Private planes are tucked behind layered corporate vehicles, trusts or consortiums. Finding out who is liable is like digging through corporate documents, charter agreements and insurance policies, yet investigation reports do not always give a definite answer. 

So who can be held liable? Let’s break down:

Pilot and cabin crew 

First stop of any investigation. 

They are at the centre of any investigation. Fatigue, human error or poor decision-making often put them at the centre of the liability claims. 

Operator company 

If the operator company neglects flight preparation, flight safety check or deployment of crew, then if any fatal accident happens, it finds itself in a legal crosshair. 

Aircraft owner 

Things are a bit tricky here. Often, the owner is not an individual, but a trust or a shell company registered in a tax haven. Finding out the real owner is an investigation in itself. They are usually hidden behind this network of shell companies.   

Maintenance firms

If the crash is the result of mechanical failures or faulty repairs, then maintenance contractors shall also fall into the maze of liability.

Charter broker

The claims of misrepresentation of the safety of the private flights or failure to exercise proper due diligence may come against the broker who arranges the flight. 

Manufacturer 

This is not common, but if any defect in design or system is discovered, then manufacturers may come under the radar.

Insurers 

Ultimately, compensation comes from the insurers and individual insurance policies. But it is often noticed that insurance companies act notoriously to avoid the obligation by conducting their own investigation and trying to pin blame elsewhere to limit payouts.  

Liability does not rest on one party, actually. Multiple parties share the liability, jointly and severally, to ensure that families receive proper compensation. Yet again same problem, the process can drag on for years. 

The lawyer’s uphill battle

The path to represent the victim’s family has practical hurdles. It takes months to trace ownership through offshore shell companies. Serving a cross-border notice requires understanding and compliance with the Hague Convention procedures or bilateral treaties. 

Next comes jurisdiction. Charter agreements often come with arbitration clauses that scatter disputes among different jurisdictions, sometimes three or more. 

The victim’s family finds themselves running from one place to another. Filing probate proceedings in one country, an insurance claim in another and a negligence suit in another.

This is like a legal marathon for them, draining both financially and emotionally.

Succession battles and the estate: death, wealth, and aviation disasters

A private plane carrying a high-net-worth individual (HNI) when crashes, then the tragedy rarely ends at the crash site. A lot happens when there is a sudden loss of a business leader or a public figure. Families shatter, empires destabilise, and a long legal dispute ensues. 

History witnessed this with the sudden demise of Sanjay Gandhi in a plane crash that left not only a personal political vacuum but also reshaped the direction of Indian politics in 1980. A recent incident of the crash of a Gulfstream G-IVSP that killed Flow La Movie, a Puerto Rican music producer. This tragedy did not leave a grieving family but a rich estate, stretching across royalties, offshore assets, intellectual property and claims in multiple countries.      

These assets that NHIs hold leave behind wealth scattered across bank accounts, private equity, offshore trusts, real estate and business ventures that span continents. Now, this situation in India is further complicated because of cultural and legal realities. Many family businesses still work on ‘handshake deals’ without any formal agreements and without a will and trust.  

Role of Insurance Policies

The impact of these tragedies is financial as well. Everything like aviation liabilities policies, keyman-person insurance and personal life insurance comes into play after the accident. And when these insurance payouts into hundreds or even thousands of crores, they can either stabilise the family or turn into a long-lasting court battle.  

A hidden tension comes to the surface when grief mixes with sudden liquidity. Insurance payouts can attract various people to fuel the power struggles, like business partners, distant relatives, and estranged spouses.    

So, what we get here is that a private place crash tests the strength of wealth planning, family unity and legal safeguards. Hence, for HNIs, succession planning is not a luxury, but it is the only real defence against decades of disputes.  

Insurance coverage and denial: the big money fight

Families naturally assume that insurance will ease at least a part of the financial blow. But in reality, the actual battle does not start in the court but with an insurer. They look for different possibilities to deny insurance payouts. 

One of the most common grounds for denial is pilot error. Even a minor issue with licensing can be a ground for denial. For instance, if a pilot is flying at night and he lacks a valid night license, then the claim can be denied. 

Maintenance is another big reason. If any scheduled inspection is skipped by any aircraft or uses a non-certified part then a ‘material non-disclosure clause’ is invoked by the insurer and then refuses to pay.   

The international aspect makes the private aviation dispute more complex. For any Indian-origin victim, if his plane is registered in tax havens and insured by Bermuda, London or Singapore underwriters, this means spending a huge sum of money just to fight over jurisdiction even before the actual claim is heard.  

Insurers play a long game. They are well aware that families are grieving and they can accept a fraction of the actual payout. That is why private aviation insurance disputes are not just about policy language, but about timing, strategy and sheer endurance. Those who go unprepared often end up with far less than what was promised by the insurers.  

Product liability and defective aircraft claims

When a private plane crashes and there’s no clear evidence of pilot error or maintenance issues, focus shifts to the aircraft manufacturer and the possibility of a product defect. This opens the door to one of the most technical, expensive, and complicated types of litigation, i.e., aviation product liability.

On paper, the principle is simple. If a design flaw or manufacturing defect played a role in the crash, the manufacturer (or component supplier) can be held liable. In practice, proving that link is anything but simple. 

Modern business jets are not built by a single company but by vast networks of suppliers scattered across multiple countries. 

Tracing a fault in an altimeter, a hydraulic system, or a flight control module often requires access to proprietary data that manufacturers are reluctant to release without a court order.

Aircraft manufacturers routinely deploy forum non conveniens arguments, attempting to shift cases to jurisdictions with weaker product liability laws. Many contracts include limitations of liability or mandatory arbitration clauses buried deep in delivery agreements.

Plaintiffs who succeed usually do so in the US (particularly in states like California or Texas) or EU courts, which apply strict liability doctrines. However, securing jurisdiction in those courts often hinges on the aircraft’s point of manufacture or sale, not its crash location. 

Regulatory investigations: how DGCA, AAIB, and global bodies respond

The sequence feels almost predictable when a private plane crashes. Rescue operations are finished by the first responders. Then the investigators reach the crash site.    

But does this guarantee accountability or timely investigation? 

Absolutely not. Private aviation in India operates under a weaker system. Investigation is often delayed, and reports are not transparent. The process in commercial aviation is completely different. Strict rules are to be followed by the agencies and protocols are time-tested. Reports prepared are detailed and transparent and this leads to strong safety measures.    

Framework in India

India has two main authorities on paper:

Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA)

DGCA oversees licensing, registration of aircraft and certification of airworthiness.

Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB)

AAIB comes into play when a plane crash occurs. This is responsible for investigating these crashes.  

For private planes, jurisdictional overlaps and limited resources weaken the effect of these bodies. Specifically, if this aircraft is operating in India but is foreign-registered.  

The problem here is that, even after a thorough investigation on the technical side, the findings are not admissible in the court. This makes the road to justice harder for the victim’s family. 

The puzzle of insurance

Let’s see the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Janus Aviation Pvt. Ltd. (2024). The insurer’s appeal to wiggle out of the liability was rejected by the Bombay High Court. This case highlighted a pattern: to deny claims, insurers often rely on technical interpretations of the policy language, while the operators and families are left tangled in litigation. These disputes aren’t just about the contracts, but they go to the heart of the possibility of the existence of any remedy at all.

Cases that tell the story

Learjet 45 VT-DBL, Mumbai (2023)

Amid heavy rainfall, a Learjet 45 aircraft veered off the runway at Mumbai airport, leaving eight on-board people injured. The preliminary investigation held by AAIB pointed out the gaps in the qualifications of the crew and operational compliance. Even in high-end private aviation, the lapses in oversight cannot be isolated but systematic.   

Cessna 152, Faizabad (2018)   

A Cessna 152 aircraft, VT-PTD, was involved in a forced landing on the Saryu river bed in Faizabad. This incident revealed just how fragile safety systems can be at smaller operators and academics.   

What is the common thread in these cases?

It is the lack of uniform, enforceable standards that match those applicable to commercial planes. 

Transparency matters

AAIB does not reveal the report at a transparent level, with proper clarity and is often delayed. This is very different from the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) or Australia’s ATSB.  

Beechcraft B-200 King Air, Essendon, Australia (2017)  

This was one interesting case in which an Indian-origin executive was killed. Australia’s ATSB not only identified the pilot’s error but also issued a public safety bulletin, recognised contributing and non-contributing factors and published the report transparently. It later even played a role in resolving civil and insurance claims.     

The victim’s family in India faces bureaucratic roadblocks when trying to access the data of the black box, maintenance records or interim findings. Even when they use their Right to Information (RTI), key documents are denied on the pretext of national security, or if accepted, then they are shared in redacted form.  

What do recent patterns in private plane crashes reveal?

Every private plane crash is a human tragedy. But if we look into the bigger picture, patterns begin to emerge. And these patterns expose the operational lapses and deep legal blind spots. These plain crashes are not some random events.

Taking the example of a crash of Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin’s Embraer Legacy 600 in 2023. The headlines were dominated because of the political angle, but something different was noticed by the aviation lawyers. A complete lack of transparency around the history of the maintenance of the jet, crew vetting and basic security protocols. Much information was kept secret from the public by private ownership.   

Another case was a Cessna citation in Virginia in 2023. This plane flew on autopilot and ran out of fuel midair. It crashed and killed all the passengers on board, including a senior executive’s child.   

Initial theories pointed to cabin depressurisation. But the investigation revealed that the confidentiality clause between the servicing firm and the plane owner blocked access to critical data. The families had to fight just to access the evidence that explained their loss, before they could even think of compensation.    

Three patterns stand out across these incidents:

• Being registered under shell companies or trusts helps protect privacy and avoid taxes. But this makes it hard to set liability and ownership.
• Maintenance, operations and crew training are often spread across multiple firms. Now, when something goes wrong, deciding accountability gets complicated, which further complicates the litigation.  
• Insurers often use technical language to delay and deny payouts. 

These patterns show that the problem is not just negligence, but also the systematic gaps. The baseline of accountability is missing. 

Ending note

Private aviation may provide freedom and luxury, but the legal aftermath after a crash tells a different story. Ownership is the major issue because it is often hidden behind offshore trusts. Contracts and waivers bury the liabilities. And, insurers try harder to deny payouts to the victim’s family. 

Where in commercial aviation the process is quite transparent and provides statutory protections, families of the victims of private plane crashes are left to go through long battles for compensation.

Hence, reform is overdue. Extension of liability rules like the Montreal Convention to private aviation, enforcement of mandatory insurance with real audits, putting limitations on unfair waivers and putting accident reports transparently are the bare minimum.   

The law must not fall when a private plane falls. Only commercial aviation must not have the privilege of accountability and oversight.  

FAQs

What is the first legal step that families should take after a private plane crash?

After a crash, the families should get in touch with an experienced aviation lawyer. This should ideally be in every jurisdiction, including where it was registered, insured or operated. Preservation of evidence is also important, the chain of custody is maintained, and official accident reports are obtained without delay. 

Can a foreign company be sued in India?

Yes, but it can be quite complicated because legal notices may need to be served and claims filed in the foreign jurisdiction where the company is registered. It’s usually better to start parallel proceedings in India to secure interim relief.

Can a private plane crash trigger criminal liability?

Criminal liability in a private plane crash is a rare scenario. Unless gross negligence, unauthorised maintenance, or falsified documents are proved by the investigator, no case crosses the threshold of criminal charges.

Do private plane passengers have any consumer rights?

No, the private plane passenger does not qualify as a ‘consumer’ under the  Consumer Protection Act 2019 until they pay for their ticket directly. But, as an alternative, families may pursue remedies under tort or contract laws.

References:

Serato DJ Crack 2025Serato DJ PRO Crack