A recent ruling dealing with air traveller’s rights has been delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Union just in time before the fast approaching holiday season. The eventuality of mobile boarding stairs colliding with an aircraft cannot be considered as ‘extraordinary circumstances’ in terms of EU law.
In such cases, an airline cannot, therefore, exonerate itself from its obligation to pay compensation for a flight delay of more than three hours.
EU law and case-law clearly stipulate a number of obligations which air carriers must honour in the eventuality of denied boarding, cancellations or delays of flights. One of these obligations relates to the payment of compensation by airlines to those passengers who are the victims of a flight cancellation, denied boarding or a delay of more than three hours. An air carrier is, however, relieved of such an obligation if it can prove that the cancellation or the delay was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures were taken.
The facts around which this ruling revolved were as follows. Three individuals booked a flight from Turkey to Frankfurt but the flight was delayed by more than six hours. The airline alleged that the delay was attributable to damage caused to the aircraft the evening before when a set of mobile boarding stairs collided with the aircraft, causing structural damage to a wing. As a result of the incident, the aircraft had to be replaced. The airline insisted that the incident was to be considered as ‘extraordinary circumstances’ and that it was therefore relieved of the obligation to pay compensation to the stranded passengers. The German court seized of the case requested guidance by way of a preliminary reference made to the Court of Justice of the European Union as to whether the circumstances in question could be classified as ‘extraordinary circumstances’ in terms of EU law.
What ought to be considered as ‘extraordinary circumstances’or otherwise has been the source of much debate
The CJEU noted that it was not the first time that it had pronounced itself to the effect that technical problems could be regarded as ‘extraordinary circumstances’. This was so, provided that they emanate from an event which, because of its nature or origin, is not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier and is beyond its actual control. The Court observed that mobile stairs or gangways are indispensable to air passenger transport and air carriers regularly encounter situations arising from the use of such equipment. It, however, concluded that a collision between an aircraft and a set of mobile boarding stairs ought to be regarded as an event inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier. The Court observed that the damage suffered by the aircraft in this case was not caused by an act outside the use of normal airport services as would be the case in the eventuality of sabotage or terrorism. The incident could not, hence, be considered as ‘extraordinary circumstances’.
The Court ruled that, in this particular case, given the considerable delay in the arrival of the flight, the air carrier could not be relieved of its obligation to pay the passengers compensation.
What ought to be considered as ‘extraordinary circumstances’ or otherwise has been the source of much debate and the CJEU has on numerous occasions had the opportunity to pronounce itself on the matter. Each ruling sheds more light as to what rights air travellers actually enjoy in the light of EU law and jurisprudence and which are the obligations that airlines have to honour.
Mariosa Vella Cardona is a freelance legal consultant specialising in European law, competition law, consumer law and intellectual property law.