Ryanair CEO disputes claim passenger was partially sucked out of plane window

DUBLIN — A legal and public relations conflict has emerged between Ryanair and a severely injured passenger over whether a mid-flight window failure resulted in a man being partially sucked out of the aircraft or merely pulled toward the opening. While the passenger's legal team and witnesses describe a near-fatal exit from the fuselage, Ryanair CEO Michael O'Leary has dismissed these claims as "delusional," asserting that the physics of a fastened seatbelt made such an occurrence impossible.

The dispute centers on a July 10 flight from Thessaloniki, Greece, to Memmingen, Germany. Ljubisa Karović, a 61-year-old Serbian businessman, suffered serious neck and shoulder injuries and friction burns after a window shattered during the climb. The distinction between being "sucked towards" a window and being "partly through" it is the primary point of contention as the airline seeks to limit its financial liability.

Related YouTube video

Engine Failure and Cabin Depressurization

The incident began shortly after takeoff when a fan blade in the Boeing 737-800's right engine experienced a separation. According to a preliminary report from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), fragments from the broken blade struck the fuselage and the right horizontal stabilizer. This debris penetrated the metal surrounding the engine and shattered the passenger window at row 11.

Flight attendants reported a loud, continuous vibration and the appearance of smoke or fog filling the cabin immediately before oxygen masks deployed. Ljubisa Karović, seated in row 11, reported hearing a loud "explosion" followed by objects flying around the cabin and out through the hole, according to Chronicle Live.

The aircraft eventually returned safely to Greece. To stabilize the cabin, flight attendants used a metal box to block the shattered window after initial attempts to use a bag failed, as the bag was immediately sucked out of the aircraft, according to witness accounts reported by The Guardian.

The Conflict of Testimony

The central tension lies in the physical position of Mr. Karović during the depressurization. His lawyer, Vasilis Tsiaras, alleges that Karović was "hurled out of the window from his chest up" and lost consciousness. This account is supported by Karović's wife, Svetlana Grković, who claims she saw her husband "half in and out of the plane" and managed to hold onto his legs while other passengers assisted in pulling him back inside.

Michael O'Leary has categorically disputed this version of events. Speaking to reporters following Ryanair's annual general meeting in Dublin on September 10, O'Leary stated that while the passenger was "certainly sucked in very dramatic circumstances towards the window," he never actually exited the craft.

"He wasn’t partially out the window. Part of his face didn’t get out the window. We don’t think any part of his body got out the window,"

Michael O'Leary, Ryanair CEO, via Times of India

O'Leary's primary argument is based on the safety equipment. He emphasized that Karović was "belted into the seat," arguing that the restraint system would have prevented any part of the passenger's anatomy from bending out of the window. He further characterized the claims made by Grković as "somewhat delusional," noting that she was sitting three rows behind her husband at the time of the incident, according to reports from Yahoo News SG.

Regulatory Findings and NTSB Rebuke

The NTSB's preliminary findings provide a third perspective that contradicts the CEO's absolute dismissal. The agency's report notes that a flight attendant realized Karović "was lodged in the damaged window" and that other passengers had to assist in pulling him back into the cabin. After the rescue, Karović was moved to row 12 and treated by an on-board doctor.

This regulatory record has put the NTSB at odds with Ryanair's leadership. NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy issued a letter criticizing O'Leary for making public statements regarding an open investigation. Homendy noted that accredited representatives are prohibited from providing opinions or analysis that suggest potential areas of interest in an ongoing probe, stating that O'Leary's comments violated international rules.

Financial Implications and Liability

The debate over whether Karović was "lodged in" or "out of" the window has significant implications for the resulting payout. Ryanair's legal team is in contact with the passenger's lawyer, and O'Leary has acknowledged that Karović is entitled to "some compensation" due to his injuries.

However, the airline is fighting to prevent the incident from becoming a catalyst for a class action lawsuit or a payout described as "millions and millions." By insisting that the passenger never actually exited the fuselage, Ryanair aims to frame the event as a severe internal incident rather than a near-total ejection from the aircraft, which would likely carry a much higher liability valuation.

The final determination of the passenger's physical position — and the subsequent financial consequences for Ryanair, will depend on the final report from the NTSB. These comprehensive probes typically require between one and two years to complete.