Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

Vauban

It seems to me Glances that you have a pretty good handle on this. The fact that the airline won't respond constructively to your letters only reflects on them - not you. You have a good case, so don't feel undermined - go for it with confidence! It's not as hard as it first appears.

howticklediam

Glances wrote: »

EDIT: Forgot to add, when quoting a website or a court ruling (I'm referencing Huzar vs Jet2), how do you all reference it?

Here's a useful page.

http://www.reading.ac.uk/library/finding-info/guides/lib-citing-legal.aspx

There are a few accepted ways to cite. Google for "citing court cases", there's plenty of info available.

NoviceAngel

Tyzap wrote: »

Vauban, this is not a legal experts view, it's my own view with advice from others!!

Jet2 have asked the court to grant further blanket stays, based on the Dutch VDL case, on all cases that were previously stayed due to the Huzar case.

Bott & Co will be arguing that this should not be allowed.

If Jet2 lose this argument they are likely to ask the judge for permission to appeal. It is hoped that this will be refused, in which case Jet2 will probably appeal directly to the Court of Appeal (again) in writing. It is further hoped that the Court of Appeal would then also refuse their request (again) leaving them with no other options.

As any appeal is a paper process, it should not take too long to run its course.

It's an important case due to the fact that the Liverpool court decision, although not precedent setting, will become persuasive. In other words this decision will be followed by other courts.

I will be attending the hearing, which looks like it is attracting a lot of interest and could be a pretty busy court room, and will report back afterwards on this thread.

Yes, that's the way I also look at this, I would be surprised if they don't appeal, given how intransigent they have been previously.

There's also the advantage of hearing the arguments put and the Judges response and reasoning, that could be used in any other cases. The fact that my own case in Leeds CC has not progressed for months, since the Huzar SC ruling would suggest that all Jet2 cases are dependant on the outcome of the Allen case.

I think the Courts are centrally trying to make block decisions and have a consistent approach to these cases.

I hope there's a little room for an :A in that Courtroom.

@ Tyzap perhaps we could issue a joint statement :beer:

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

legal_magpie

NoviceAngel wrote: »

I think the Courts are centrally trying to make block decisions and have a consistent approach to these cases.

NoviceAngel

Wow! That is a great summary of what could be a whole lecture on constitutional law and English Legal System. In Latin "Stare decisis" (to stand by decisions)


This is one of the main principles of the common law but i9t is also based on decisions of higher courts being binding on lower courts. The water is muddied when you are talking about decisions of the same level of judges which are not binding on judges of the same level.


In particular, decisions of individual District judges are not binding on other District Judges but they can (and frequently are) be persuasive.


However, where a Court gets a large number of cases of an identical nature it is not uncommon for the Judges to agree that all cases of that type should be allocated to one Judge to get consistency. This is what has happened in Liverpool although it has gone a stage further in that some Courts are also transferring airline cases to Liverpool.

NoviceAngel

legal_magpie wrote: »

Wow! That is a great summary of what could be a whole lecture on constitutional law and English Legal System. In Latin "Stare decisis" (to stand by decisions)....

....However, where a Court gets a large number of cases of an identical nature it is not uncommon for the Judges to agree that all cases of that type should be allocated to one Judge to get consistency. This is what has happened in Liverpool although it has gone a stage further in that some Courts are also transferring airline cases to Liverpool.

LOL, well I always make my point in the most uneducated way! :beer:

It seems that my case and many others appear to be 'stayed' unofficially until the Allen case. I know DR_A Harrogates case was transferred to Liverpool and I've read of a few others. You can imagine that Bott have quite a few in the system that they are currently awaiting the outcome of Liverpool. My case also appears to be on hold, I submitted paperwork to the Court back in November to get my stay lifted, Jet2 put in the Van der Lan objection, nothing back from the court so far.

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

NoviceAngel

howticklediam wrote: »

Pretty sure it relates to VDL, but they haven't got back to me yet.

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/radio4/moneybox/moneybox_20150221-1234b.mp3

Interesting indeed.......

BBC wrote:

A County Court case in Liverpool next week could decide what happens to the backlog of claims over compensation delays. Five airlines are defying the Supreme Court by refusing to obey EU law and pay passengers for long delays. Simon Calder, travel editor of the Independent joins the show.

Mark2spark

Afaia the judge at l'pool can refuse permission to appeal there and then, J2 then have to go to the CoA to get permission to appeal, which is quite a quick decision normally, as it'll be based on 'what *NEW* evidence is being offered to justify the appeal'.

NoviceAngel

Mark2spark wrote: »

Afaia the judge at l'pool can refuse permission to appeal there and then, J2 then have to go to the CoA to get permission to appeal, which is quite a quick decision normally, as it'll be based on 'what *NEW* evidence is being offered to justify the appeal'.

Am I correct in saying that they could go to the Supreme Court for permission to appeal ~ going the same way as Huzar ?

If so, that could be a few months, couldn't it?

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

Mark2spark

No I don't believe so. If the CoA refuses permission to appeal then that's it.
But IANAL lol

phil_h

Hi Martin

have try to get a claim from Jet2 over a delay of flight to Rome from Manchester in October 2012 at the time we got back sent a complain to them over the delay with in 2 months but got reply back saying it was technical issue sorry could not claim only just found things had changed
so sent letters to jet2 over the claim back and fourth sorting the info
and now got letter back saying can not accept our claim there terms and conditions proceedings must be brought no more than two years: