Must extraordinary circumstances relate directly to the booked flight?

Centipede100

This question was referred to the ECJ in February in Case C-68/13 Weiss v Condor: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/documen...t=1&cid=477772

Whilst it is unlikely to produce a judgment on the matter much before the middle of next year at the earliest, potential claimants will be able to rely on the eventual ruling at some stage for claims involving delay and cancellation under 261/2004.

I suspect that the answer that will be provided by the honourable judges will not be a silver bullet type response but will be something along the lines of it depends on the facts of each case but we shall see.

P_Doff

Centipede100 wrote: »

This question was referred to the ECJ in February in Case C-68/13 Weiss v Condor: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=261%252F2004&docid=135868&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=477772

Whilst it is unlikely to produce a judgment on the matter much before the middle of next year at the earliest, potential claimants will be able to rely on the eventual ruling at some stage for claims involving delay and cancellation under 261/2004.

I suspect that the answer that will be provided by the honourable judges will not be a silver bullet type response but will be something along the lines of it depends on the facts of each case but we shall see.

I am due in Court in 3 weeks. I am arguing that a technical fault is not EC and that it happened on the previous flight. If the judge is minded to accept that it is EC, can I then ask for a stay pending judgement in the above case?

romanby1

Centipede100 wrote: »

This question was referred to the ECJ in February in Case C-68/13 Weiss v Condor: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=261%252F2004&docid=135868&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=req&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=477772

Whilst it is unlikely to produce a judgment on the matter much before the middle of next year at the earliest, potential claimants will be able to rely on the eventual ruling at some stage for claims involving delay and cancellation under 261/2004.

I suspect that the answer that will be provided by the honourable judges will not be a silver bullet type response but will be something along the lines of it depends on the facts of each case but we shall see.

I agree with the above.
If problems with a plane on an earlier flight can be transferred to a later flight the airlines will be able to use any excuse they can think of and 261/2004 will be virtually useless regarding claims for flight delays and the passenger will be in the same situation as previously.
The court should insist that airlines cannot transfer a problem and should have enough slack in the system to cover most eventualities

JPears

One does have to ask why it takes SOO long for these cases to be heard?

Mark2spark

P_Doff wrote: »

I am due in Court in 3 weeks. I am arguing that a technical fault is not EC and that it happened on the previous flight. If the judge is minded to accept that it is EC, can I then ask for a stay pending judgement in the above case?

Surely there's enough established case history to counteract that?
Don't forget the second test of using all reasonable measures short of intolerable sacrifice.

P_Doff

Mark2spark wrote: »

Surely there's enough established case history to counteract that?
Don't forget the second test of using all reasonable measures short of intolerable sacrifice.

I believe that there is Mark. The second test is covered in my statement. I am just concerned that I might get lumbered with the same judge that heard JP's case (or one equally as ill informed). It would have been useful if (s)he said "yes its EC" to stay until the pending case was ruled upon. But as Centipede points out, undoubtedly correctly, it can't be done.