PARIS, Nov 27 (Reuters) – After eight weeks in court, the trial surrounding the 2009 crash of an Air France jet that claimed the lives of all 228 on board entered its final phase on Thursday, with Air France and Airbus defending themselves against charges of involuntary manslaughter.

On Wednesday, the prosecution appealed to the Paris Appeals Court to overturn a previous ruling that had cleared both companies of responsibility for the crash. The Airbus A330 had plummeted into the Atlantic Ocean while flying from Rio de Janeiro to Paris through a tropical storm.

Investigators retrieved the flight data recorders two years after the incident and found that the pilots had mishandled a situation caused by icing of external sensors, which briefly disabled the aircraft’s ability to gauge its airspeed and ultimately led to the jet stalling.

The focus of the trial, however, was not solely on the crew's response. Prosecutors scrutinized prior issues with similar sensors and pointed to alleged failures in communication and training that may have played a part in the accident.

During final submissions, Air France expressed sympathy toward the victims' families and denied claims that the AF447 crew lacked proper training for stall recovery or emergency scenarios at high altitude. Airbus was expected to present its concluding defense later the same day.

The court is anticipated to take several months before issuing a final judgment. Legal experts note that either outcome may prompt further appeals, potentially prolonging the legal process for years to come.

Proceedings have taken place in a courtroom steeped in French legal history, previously hosting trials such as those of Nazi collaborator Philippe Pétain and the 1961 failed military coup leaders known as the Algiers putsch.

Now under examination are two cornerstone institutions of French aviation, both heavily supported by the state, as they seek to uphold their reputations in the face of public and judicial scrutiny.

On Wednesday, prosecutor Rodolphe Juy-Birmann accused both Air France and Airbus of failing in their duties, saying these failings contributed to the fatal event. He criticized Airbus particularly for allegedly releasing details to the court gradually, rather than in full.

Airbus insisted it had done everything possible to help the court understand the causes of the accident.

The prosecutor asked the court to impose the maximum fine for corporate manslaughter on both companies—225,000 euros ($260,640) each. Both firms continue to reject the accusations.

Following the five-hour closing statement, relatives of the victims embraced one another, describing this stage of the process as a moment of emotional relief compared to the tense atmosphere of earlier proceedings.

"After 16 years, this is the first time we’ve felt treated with true compassion and dignity," said Daniele Lamy, head of the victims’ association, who lost her son in the crash.

Prosecutors challenged earlier findings that put the primary blame on pilot error in managing the loss of airspeed data.

However, in order for manslaughter charges to hold, they must not only demonstrate negligence but also prove how those failings directly caused the tragedy.

The initial ruling in 2023 acknowledged mistakes by both Air France and Airbus, but determined that there was no direct link between those errors and the disaster.

($1 = 0.8633 euros)