{
"locale": "en-UK"
}
Compensation is not payable for every flight disruption. So it may be that the airline refuses to pay compensation even though your flight was cancelled or delayed more than 3 hours beyond the scheduled landing time. The main exceptional circumstances in which the air carrier is not obliged to pay compensation include the following
In the case of weather conditions and adverse weather, the intensity is important and is always assessed on an individual basis. Heavy rain or a light thunderstorm may not affect the flight in some situations. However, if accompanied by gusty winds, for example, air traffic control may decide not to clear the aircraft for take-off or to delay the flight.
The list of extraordinary circumstances above is indicative and is gradually being expanded by the practice of the CJEU, which also considers other situations that could potentially be classified as extraordinary circumstances. We look at some of these below. If you are looking for information on denied boarding, known as overbooking, please read our separate article.
The CJEU bases all its decisions on Article 5(3) of EU Regulation 261/2004 in relation to claims for compensation for disrupted flights. According to it, an airline is exempt from the obligation to pay financial compensation if it proves that the cancellation or delay of the flight was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. The CJEU has adopted two basic rules which must be cumulatively satisfied in order for a circumstance affecting a given situation to be classified as 'extraordinary'. The circumstance must relate to an event which, firstly, is not inherent in the normal course of the air carrier's activities and, secondly, by reason of its nature or origin, is beyond its effective control. It is sufficient for one of these criteria not to be met for a passenger to be entitled to compensation for a cancelled or delayed flight.
The issue of strikes is one of the most debated in the context of extraordinary circumstances. In general, strikes are mentioned in the EU Regulation in the list of events that can be classified as exceptional circumstances. However, the CJEU has issued several key decisions which say which strikes are exceptional circumstances and which are not.
A strike by pilots or airline staff is considered by the CJEU to be a situation for which the airline is responsible. If your flight is disrupted because of a strike called directly by the pilots or other staff of the carrier or by the carrier's employees' union, passengers are entitled to compensation.
This is a very important decision, which says that the air carrier is responsible for such a situation, so we do not class this type of strike as an extraordinary circumstance.
A strike by airport staff, unlike a strike by airline staff, is considered an exceptional circumstance. If your flight is disrupted because of such a strike, you are unfortunately not entitled to compensation. The CJEU has thus quite logically decided to separate the two situations, and in the case of a strike by airport staff or air traffic control staff, the carrier is not liable as it cannot influence the situation in any way. Thus, in the course of their journeys, passengers may have encountered a number of strikes by, for example, airport baggage handlers in recent years. However, the most common strike is an ATC strike, which affects air traffic throughout the territory. Airlines cannot usually do anything about these situations and are not obliged to compensate passengers for cancellations, delays or missed connecting flights.
The CJEU distinguishes between circumstances that arise from the airline's activities (internal) and those that are independent of the airline's activities (external). External circumstances are almost always considered to constitute an extraordinary circumstance. They are caused either by natural events or by the actions of third parties.
In the case of technical defects, it is then relevant whether the defect is a defect which occurs on the aircraft due to its lack of maintenance or during maintenance, or a defect which was beyond the control of the air carrier. If the technical problem arises during maintenance and results, for example, from normal wear and tear of the aircraft, it is a situation for which the air carrier is responsible and for which passengers are entitled to compensation in the event of cancellation or delay of the flight.
However, if the technical defect is caused by a situation which the airline could not have foreseen or prevented, it is an extraordinary circumstance for which the carrier is not liable and thus no compensation is payable.
A bird strike is one of the most common reasons you may encounter if your airline denies your claim for compensation. The CJEU has ruled that if a flight is delayed or cancelled due to a previous bird strike that caused a technical fault or a necessary aircraft inspection, there is no claim for financial compensation. Again, this is a logical decision as the airline could not have foreseen or anticipated this situation in any way.
However, it is important to note that airlines often abuse this reason and you may find that the airline refuses to pay compensation, citing a bird strike that did not actually occur.
You may encounter a number of other situations during your travels that may delay or even cancel your flight. To conclude, here are two more interesting situations and their assessment from the point of view of compensation.
Among other things, the CJEU has dealt with a situation where the pilot of an aircraft had to make an unscheduled landing at another airport due to the disruptive behaviour of one of the passengers on board. The crew disembarked the passenger and his luggage and then proceeded to the final destination. As you may suspect, this will again be an exceptional circumstance for which passengers are not entitled to compensation. The airline had no control over the situation.
A rather controversial decision in recent years is then the delay or cancellation of a flight due to the illness or even death of the pilot or other aircraft staff before departure. The CJEU has ruled that such situations entitle passengers to compensation, unless a large number of airline staff fall ill, thus crippling the airline's operations. The airline must therefore have replacement staff on each flight in case something similar happens and is thus liable for any disruption to the flight. Although this is (fortunately) a more or less exceptional situation which always needs to be assessed on an individual basis, you should be entitled to compensation in such a case.
The procedure of each airline may differ in some respects. If you see the airline that operated your flight in the list below, you can read the specific article on how to get compensation.