The frustration of many pet owners stemmed from a ruling made by the European Union Court of Justice on October 17, 2025. Included in the ruling was a case involving Iberia Airlines which classified dogs in cargo holds as baggage. This stemmed from a case involving a missing dog, Mona, on a flight from Buenos Aires to Barcelona in October 2019. This case also determined that compensation for the airline’s responsibility should be capped under the Montreal Convention. For Mona’s owner Grisel Ortiz, the compensation limits only made an already painful situation that much worse.

Ortiz’s emotional journey, which began with the frantic search for her lost pet and ended with this legal decision, has drawn attention to the treatment of animals in the airline industry and the limitations of compensation for families who lose their pets in transit. This decision isn’t just about a dog being lost; it’s about the deep emotional connection between pets and their owners and the responsibility airlines have to ensure their safety.

The Case: Mona, the Lost Dog

In 2019, Mona, a beloved dog, was traveling with her owner Grisel Ortiz in the cargo hold of an Iberia flight from Buenos Aires to Barcelona. Due to Mona’s size and weight, she was required to travel in a pet carrier in the cargo hold, as per the airline’s pet transportation policies. However, during the boarding process at the airport, Mona managed to escape from her carrier and ran across the runway. Despite being chased by airport staff in three vans, Mona was never caught and ultimately went missing.

Ortiz, who had grown deeply attached to Mona, described the pain she felt when she saw the frantic scene unfold. “Many people laugh because they don’t understand what Mona means to me,” Ortiz explained in a heartfelt interview with Argentine daily Clarin in 2020. “Since she went missing, all I do is cry and stay glued to my phone, waiting for a miracle.”

In an effort to locate her missing pet, Ortiz created a Facebook page dedicated to Mona’s whereabouts, offering a reward for any credible information. Despite her best efforts, she never found any leads, leaving her devastated. Feeling helpless and heartbroken, she sought legal action against Iberia Airlines, asking for 5,000 euros (about $5,400) in damages.

The Court’s Ruling and Its Impact

After years of legal battles, the case was brought before the European Union Court of Justice. The court sided with Iberia Airlines, ruling that the dog was considered baggage, and thus compensation was limited to what the Montreal Convention allows for checked baggage.

The Montreal Convention, an international treaty that governs airline liability, sets a cap on compensation for lost or damaged baggage, including pets, if they are not declared as valuable at check-in. Under the Convention, airlines are required to compensate passengers for lost baggage, but the amount is typically much lower for pets than it would be for human belongings.

The European court’s reasoning was that the term “baggage” could reasonably encompass pets, as long as the airline met specific welfare standards for transporting animals. However, it also stated that if a passenger had declared the animal as valuable at check-in and paid an additional fee, the compensation could be higher. Unfortunately, Ortiz had not made such a declaration, and the court ruled that Iberia was not responsible for more than the standard compensation for baggage.

Emotional and Legal Reactions

The ruling has left Grisel Ortiz and her lawyer, Carlos Villacorta Salis, deeply disappointed. Salis criticized the decision, calling it a “missed opportunity” to protect animals and give them the legal recognition they deserve. He expressed frustration with the idea that no airline in the world would allow passengers to make a special declaration for pets traveling in the cargo hold.

For Ortiz, the ruling is another painful chapter in the saga of Mona’s disappearance. “I wanted justice for my dog. I wanted recognition for the bond we shared, and this ruling makes me feel like she was just cargo,” Ortiz shared. The emotional toll on her has been immense, as she continues to grieve the loss of a companion who meant so much to her.

The case has also sparked a larger conversation about animal rights and the treatment of pets during air travel. Animal welfare advocates have criticized the airline industry for not doing enough to ensure the safety and well-being of animals transported in cargo holds. While the European court did emphasize the importance of animal welfare during transport, it also highlighted the legal limitations that exist when it comes to compensating passengers for lost pets.

Global Incidents: Missing Pets and Airline Responsibility

The loss of Mona isn’t an isolated incident. Around the world, there have been other cases where pets have gone missing during air travel, leading to similar outcry from pet owners and animal rights groups. In 2024, a dog named Amalka escaped at Paris’ Charles de Gaulle Airport, causing the temporary closure of two runways as officials searched for her. Amalka was eventually found and returned to her owner after nine days of being at large.

Similarly, in 2023, a Chihuahua named Maia escaped from her carrier at Atlanta’s Hartsfield-Jackson Airport in the U.S. The dog ran onto an active runway, causing a major disruption. After 22 days, Maia was found and reunited with her owner thanks to a Good Samaritan.

These incidents underline the risks and challenges associated with traveling with pets in the cargo hold. While some dogs are successfully recovered, the emotional strain on pet owners who experience these kinds of losses is profound. In both Amalka’s and Maia’s cases, the pets were eventually found, but not without significant delays and heightened stress for the owners involved.

What Does This Mean for Pet Owners Traveling by Air?

The European Union Court’s decision has significant implications for pet owners. It reinforces the notion that pets traveling in cargo hold are viewed as baggage in the eyes of the law. For those considering traveling with their pets, it’s crucial to understand the potential risks involved. If you choose to fly with your pet, it’s recommended to review your airline’s policies carefully, and if available, opt for a special declaration of interest for your pet to ensure higher compensation in case of mishaps.

Conclusion: A Missed Opportunity for Animal Welfare

New air travel pet regulations from the Court of Justice of the European Union present a “bittersweet” moment for pet parents. Although positive steps have been made in the “legislation” of “animal-human” pets, the moment begs to consider more humane regulations for the protection of pets in air travel. To Grisel Ortiz, the trauma after losing Mona a pet continues to linger, in part simply because the nature of the legal system feels to overlook the pet-human relationship.

The lack of animal legal protections in the aviation sector may still make Ortiz’s trauma story stick. Pet parents, animal lawyers, and advocates will not backdown in the aviation industry. Until that reform comes, animal advocates will push for humane regulations and animal safety during air travel. In the meantime, pet parents are encouraged to “stay informed” and take “necessary precautions” to make air travel “safe” and “less stressful” for pets.