ECJ: Delays Could Cost Airlines

[straitman]

ECJ: Delays Could Cost Airlines AW&ST

By Madhu Unnikrishnan

The European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that passengers delayed by airlines will be treated in the same way as those whose flights were canceled.

The court ruled that passengers who reach their final destinations three hours or more after the scheduled time may, like those whose flights were canceled, seek a flat-rate compensation from the airline.

 

[NM]

I can see the end result of this will be higher airfares as the airlines ensure they play the numbers games of risk vs revenue.

 

[drron]

I can see the end result of this will be higher airfares as the airlines ensure they play the numbers games of risk vs revenue.

I agree.Once again the politicians have an idea to help the consumer and once again it will hurt more consumers than it helps.

 

[serfty]

Well, with the applicability of EU regulation 261/2004 it appears that airlines were more and more "having" flights operate even more than 24 hours late where in the past they would simply have been cancelled. (Simply to avoid the cancellation penalties.)

I guess this is closing that loophole.

This is what was regulated for delays:

Delays

If an airline expects a flight to be delayed, passengers are entitled to refreshments and communication if the expected delay is more than:

* two hours, in the case of a type 1 flight [≤1500km]
* three hours, in the case of a type 2 flight [>1500 km and ≤ 3500km]
* four hours, in the case of a type 3 flight [> 3500km]

Additionally, if the flight is expected to depart on the day after the original scheduled departure time, passengers are entitled to accommodation.

If a flight is delayed by five hours, passengers are additionally entitled to abandon their journey and receive a refund for all unused tickets, a refund on tickets used already if the flight no longer serves any purpose in relation to their original travel plan, and, if relevant, a flight back to their original point of departure at the earliest opportunity.

If a flight was cancelled the following would be payable:

Cash compensation is a payment of:

1. €250, for a flight of less than 1500 km
2. €400, for flight within the EU of greater than 1500 km in distance, or any other flight of greater than 1500 km but less than 3500 km in distance
3. €600, for a flight not within EU of greater than 3500 km in distance where flight types are as defined in notes.

Where rerouting is offered and results in the passenger arriving within two/three/four hours of the scheduled arrival time for a type 1/2/3 flight, the compensation payable is halved.

This payment is strictly a compensation for the customer's inconvenience and does not replace or form a part of either of the following two compensation categories:

Rerouting or refunding

Rerouting or refunding is, at the passenger's choice, one of the following three compensations:

1. Repayment of the cost of unused flight tickets, and for used tickets where the flight(s) taken no longer serve(s) any purpose in relation to the passenger's original travel plan, and where applicable, a flight back to the original point of departure at the earliest opportunity
2. Rerouting under similar conditions to the intended final destination at the earliest opportunity
3. Rerouting under similar conditions to the intended final destination at the passenger's leisure, subject to the availability of seats.

If a passenger's destination is an airport at a city with multiple airports and rerouting results in the passenger being taken to another of those airports, the airline must also pay for transport for the passenger to the original intended airport or an agreed nearby destination.

Refreshments, communication and accommodation

When passengers become entitled to these assistances, they must be offered, free of charge,

• Meals and refreshments in proportion to the waiting time
• Two telephone calls, fax or telex messages, or emails
• Hotel accommodation and transport between the airport and the hotel, if a stay of one or more nights, or a stay additional to that intended by the passenger becomes necessary

In the case of a delay, the airline may withdraw or abrogate these entitlements if offering them would delay the flight further.

 

[thewinchester]

I'm in two minds about this here. I can understand that by bringing in enforceable penalties and arrangements it may increase the cost base to the airline which may be passed onto consumers.

However, passengers deserve to get what they pay for. By having these millstones around their necks, airlines are forced by the market to get their houses in order, and do everything they can to avoid having to make these payments.

In short, such legislative bases helps to ensure that airlines invest more money in preventative maintenance and planning to reduce/remove the risk of increased payments - striking a better balance between service delivery and the bottom line, delivering better outcomes for everyone concerned.

Having said that, its not a new issue - and industry groups like ATA have been working to strike down any attempts to legislate for this. Its nice to know that some legislators have the balls to stand up to them and balance back towards the consumer.

One just has to look at the US experience in recent years (Passengers' 'Rights' Bills Get New Ammunition, BusinessWeek, 10 Aug 2009) to see why this legislation in one form or another is important.

 

[serfty]

The actual ruling on this is quite clear and € flat rate base compensation does indeed apply for delays greater then 3 hours (in the same manner as that for cancellations).

RECENT CASE-LAW - Results

61.

In those circumstances, the Court finds that passengers whose flights are delayed may rely on the right to compensation laid down in Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004 where they suffer, on account of such flights, a loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours, that is to say when they reach their final destination three hours or more after the arrival time originally scheduled by the air carrier.​

 

[serfty]

Air delay compensation claims suspended by High Court [UK only]

BBC News - Air delay compensation claims suspended by High Court

...
The right of UK air passengers to force airlines to pay compensation for long flight delays has been suspended by the High Court.

A European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling last November gave passengers the right to compensation for long delays, not just cancellations.

But the High Court has, at the request of UK airlines, referred the matter back to the ECJ for a further hearing. ...

What this means is that any compensation claims made in the United Kingdom in relation to this "Delay Ruling" will be suspended until the EJC either confirms, modifies or overturns it.

Such resolution is not expected until 2012.

 

[samh004]

Do the rules by the ECJ offer exemptions to paying up for delays such as the Iceland volcano issue, or is it a catch-all ruling? If it's the latter I can see why there's a problem. And I'm surprised more airlines didn't join the complaint.

 

[serfty]

Do the rules by the ECJ offer exemptions to paying up for delays such as the Iceland volcano issue, or is it a catch-all ruling? If it's the latter I can see why there's a problem. And I'm surprised more airlines didn't join the complaint.

The answer to your questions are up thread.

But basically this has nothing to do with events such as the Iceland volcano issue (which was considered an extraordinary event).

It to do with the same compensation being payable for extreme delays as that for cancellation.

 

[samh004]

The answer to your questions are up thread.

Oh yes I see sorry, I was on my iPhone in bed and the brief scrolling I did seemed to get me no where

 

[Austman]

I agree.Once again the politicians have an idea to help the consumer and once again it will hurt more consumers than it helps.

Except that it's NOT the politicians. It's the ECJ where (from The Court of Justice)

The judges and advocates-general are people whose impartiality is beyond doubt.

The ECJ is an institution that I trust far more than the various governments of the EU.

 

[JeniSkunk]

Now what we need is similar legislation passed here in Australia.

Jenifur Charne

 

[serfty]

I've noted the EU have ratified thie judgement; however, the UK appeal still goes on.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:024:0004:0005:EN:PDF

Operative part of the judgment

1. Articles 2(l), 5 and 6 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the
   European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004
   establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to
   passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation
   or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC)
   No 295/91, must be interpreted as meaning that a flight
   which is delayed, irrespective of the duration of the delay, even
   if it is long, cannot be regarded as cancelled where the flight is
   operated in accordance with the air carrier’s original planning.
   ​
2. Articles 5, 6 and 7 of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted
   as meaning that passengers whose flights are delayed may
   be treated, for the purposes of the application of the right to
   compensation, as passengers whose flights are cancelled and they
   may thus rely on the right to compensation laid down in Article 7
   of the regulation where they suffer, on account of a flight delay, a
   loss of time equal to or in excess of three hours, that is, where they
   reach their final destination three hours or more after the arrival
   time originally scheduled by the air carrier. Such a delay does not,
   however, entitle passengers to compensation if the air carrier can
   prove that the long delay was caused by extraordinary circumstances
   which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable
   measures had been taken, namely circumstances beyond the actual
   control of the air carrier.
   ​
3. Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as
   meaning that a technical problem in an aircraft which leads to the
   cancellation or delay of a flight is not covered by the concept of
   ‘extraordinary circumstances’ within the meaning of that provision,
   unless that problem stems from events which, by their nature or
   origin, are not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the
   air carrier concerned and are beyond its actual control.

 

[serfty]

Now the UK as well

BBC News - Air delay compensation claims suspended by High Court

What this means is that any compensation claims made in the United Kingdom in relation to this "Delay Ruling" will be suspended until the EJC either confirms, modifies or overturns it.

Such resolution is not expected until 2012.

... and it was ratified back in October, so even in the UK, for delays of three hours or more PAX are entitled to the same compensation rights as they are for cancellations.


Passengers on delayed flights should get compensation, EU court confirms | World news | The Guardian


CJEU confirms Sturgeon: compensation due also for delayed flights | European Law Blog