Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Jet2.com ONLY

howticklediam

nat38 wrote: »

thanks JPears, I agree, it sounds BS to me too...

are Bott&Co the best? I could try and do it myself but I am not that confident and far too busy/stressed at the moment to deal with it.
I've checked their website - it says 27% + 25€.
does anyone know if there are other hidden charges?

also, what are the costs of court proceedings otherwise?

many thanks

Depends on the size of the claim but in the region of £200 for initial filing and court fees.

nat38

howticklediam wrote: »

Depends on the size of the claim but in the region of £200 for initial filing and court fees.

thanks! the claim would be for €400 x3.
with a NWNF the cost (if we win) would be about €400 in total.
£200 = €270
are there many other charges after initial filing and court fees?

batman44

Judgement- Allen v jet2.com tomorrow 10.30am

Skid_Marks

nat38 wrote: »

thanks! the claim would be for €400 x3.
with a NWNF the cost (if we win) would be about €400 in total.
£200 = €270
are there many other charges after initial filing and court fees?

Bott & Co don't have any hidden charges above the 27% plus €25 euros except that they will keep any interest if awarded by the court.

Tyzap

A brief (personal) report on today's case that I went to witness for myself.

Listening to Jet2's barrister was like being at the Supreme Court in Huzar v Jet2, a lot of the same old arguments came out.

He mentioned, on current figures, there could be more than a million claimants per annum. That NWNF solicitors were making it easy for claimants, just click to claim. That they had 450 live cases and many more on going. 75% of those are due to EC’s/Huzar.

He said that many claimants put in claims years after their delay, so it would not be much of a problem to continue the stay for Van Der Lands. The judge suggested to him that VDL could make things worse for the airlines if the eu decision went the wrong way for them.

He talked about the NEB wish list, even though it has no standing in law or the regulations. He suggested that if they lost the VDL case there would be nowhere for them to go.

The judge enquired, quite succinctly I thought, if Jet2 would would then pay out on all outstanding claims? No, they couldn’t commit to that!

Their barrister suggested that Lord Justice Elias, in the Huzar SC hearing, came close to saying that there was only one limb which needed to be satisfied in the Valentine test. But of course he didn’t.

I was waiting for some new killer punch line from Jet2’s barrister but it never arrived. What the Jet2 team did offer the judge, out of the blue, was to pay interest on cases stayed for the VDL case. Not much tho, as we are in a low interest - low inflation economy. The judge explored this aspect with their barrister for a while. At the end of the discussion tho I got the impression that he had dismissed it. But who knows!

The court broke for lunch, the judge said 45 minutes oh and that he would probably give his verdict tomorrow morning, that came as a bit of a shock as I expected a couple of weeks at least. However, he also seemed to be mindful that there are a lot of cases depending on this case as he mentioned it a couple of times.

Following lunch, Botts barrister Simon Murray, stated his case.

He started by saying there was no light at the end of the tunnel, just a continual stream of stays. Suggested that a lot of what we had heard was like the Huzar case over again.

He posed the rhetorical question, What has changed since the Huzar ruling?
then answered ‘nothing’ it is existing jurisprudence. Which, of course, it is.
He went on to counter many of the opposition barristers arguments with great effect I thought.

He also made the strong point that the Dutch court did not have a high court ruling to follow or guide it, as is the case here.

In his summing up he made the point that Jet2 have not been paying out, there is no end in sight and basically it was Huzar mk2.

I thought he did a very good job, clear and very easy to follow his logic.

And so it ended with the judge promising he would deliver his verdict at 10.30am tomorrow.

Roll on tomorrow, fingers crossed.

Disclaimer.
The above summary is just my personal interpretation of the proceeding.

Tyzap.

Vauban

Great account - many thanks for doing.

Best wishes from south central Asia for tomorrow's result - there is only one just outcome.

glentoran99

Tyzap wrote: »

A brief (personal) report on today's case that I went to witness for myself.

Listening to Jet2's barrister was like being at the Supreme Court in Huzar v Jet2, a lot of the same old arguments came out.

He mentioned, on current figures, there could be more than a million claimants per annum. That NWNF solicitors were making it easy for claimants, just click to claim. That they had 450 live cases and many more on going. 75% of those are due to EC’s/Huzar.

He said that many claimants put in claims years after their delay, so it would not be much of a problem to continue the stay for Van Der Lands. The judge suggested to him that VDL could make things worse for the airlines if the eu decision went the wrong way for them.

He talked about the NEB wish list, even though it has no standing in law or the regulations. He suggested that if they lost the VDL case there would be nowhere for them to go.

The judge enquired, quite succinctly I thought, if Jet2 would would then pay out on all outstanding claims? No, they couldn’t commit to that!

Their barrister suggested that Lord Justice Elias, in the Huzar SC hearing, came close to saying that there was only one limb which needed to be satisfied in the Valentine test. But of course he didn’t.

I was waiting for some new killer punch line from Jet2’s barrister but it never arrived. What the Jet2 team did offer the judge, out of the blue, was to pay interest on cases stayed for the VDL case. Not much tho, as we are in a low interest - low inflation economy. The judge explored this aspect with their barrister for a while. At the end of the discussion tho I got the impression that he had dismissed it. But who knows!

The court broke for lunch, the judge said 45 minutes oh and that he would probably give his verdict tomorrow morning, that came as a bit of a shock as I expected a couple of weeks at least. However, he also seemed to be mindful that there are a lot of cases depending on this case as he mentioned it a couple of times.

Following lunch, Botts barrister Stewart Murray, stated his case.

He started by saying there was no light at the end of the tunnel, just a continual stream of stays. Suggested that a lot of what we had heard was like the Huzar case over again.

He posed the rhetorical question, What has changed since the Huzar ruling?
then answered ‘nothing’ it is existing jurisprudence. Which, of course, it is.
He went on to counter many of the opposition barristers arguments with great effect I thought.

He also made the strong point that the Dutch court did not have a high court ruling to follow or guide it, as is the case here.

In his summing up he made the point that Jet2 have not been paying out, there is no end in sight and basically it was Huzar mk2.

I thought he did a very good job, clear and very easy to follow his logic.

And so it ended with the judge promising he would deliver his verdict at 10.30am tomorrow.

Roll on tomorrow, fingers crossed.

Disclaimer.
The above summary is just my personal interpretation of the proceeding.

Tyzap.

this implies the expect it to go against them and having to pay out anyway, so why the stays?

NoviceAngel

glentoran99 wrote: »

this implies the expect it to go against them and having to pay out anyway, so why the stays?

There's lots that we haven't fitted in to our respective posts, J2 did argue that if they were to pay out, and the CJEU ruled against Van der Lans then the problem would be that Jet2 had paid hundreds if not thousands of cases and how on earth would they get their money back, this was argued for some considerable time.

Cheers,

NoviceAngel

nat38

Skid_Marks wrote: »

Bott & Co don't have any hidden charges above the 27% plus €25 euros except that they will keep any interest if awarded by the court.

thanks. and when would the court award interest?

glentoran99

nat38 wrote: »

thanks. and when would the court award interest?

thats at the judges discretion if it goes to hearing