The Canadian Supreme Court has refused to hear an appeal by top airlines Air Canada and WestJet after the two objected to a January 2008 decision by the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) entitling oversized passengers to two airline seats for a single price on domestic flights. The court ruled that the airlines failed to prove that a "one-person, one-fare" policy would cause them undue hardship.

Passenger size and comfort is a touchy subject. While many nations protect the rights of disabled travelers, the debate over weight and its classification as a disability lingers on without clear definition. As a result, airlines are forced to institute their own policies, often making headlines when enforcing them. Air Canada and WestJet had a year from January 2008 to implement the policy of allowing two seats for a single price for qualified passengers. As a result of the court's refusal to hear the airlines' appeals, the new policy will be in effect from January 2009. The ruling applies only to domestic flights and doesn't include the domestic portion of an international flight. The ruling also applies to disabled fliers who require an attendant to accompany them on flights.

The CTA stresses that they are not mandating free seats to persons who are merely uncomfortable in their seats due to their size. They recommend that airlines follow a policy established by U.S. carrier Southwest Airlines which allows an additional seat for persons too large to lower the arm rest.

The unique configuration of aircraft and the required safety minimums pose additional problems for airlines when it comes to passenger size. Airlines argue that, since an unsold seat is lost revenue, requiring a passenger to pay an additional fare or a premium for an extra seat mitigates this loss of revenue while providing more comfort for the traveler. Since many customers and advocates consider the transport of passengers by air equivalent to bus, train and ferry transport, the debate will continue for quite some time.

What do you think of the ruling? Is it discriminatory to require larger passengers to pay for an extra seat? Is it a question of safety or comfort?