Compensation for delayed flights Discussion Area

eskbanker

ronpickering said:
So I am now invite to give final passenger comments so any help/advice would be appreciated.

It looks to me that they have a fairly compelling case that extraordinary circumstances prevented the aircraft from flying from BER to MAN the night before, so that effectively moves the conversation on to whether they took all reasonable measures to mitigate that.

Their boilerplate 'intolerable sacrifice' response to that appears to be effectively saying 'we can't have standby aircraft and crews everywhere', which is a strawman - the question is whether it's reasonable to expect them to be able to rustle up a spare (crewed) plane to operate the BCN-MAN flight the next morning, so I'd ask them to demonstrate clearly why this wasn't practical, assuming they haven't already covered that elsewhere within their response, i.e. where were all their spares deployed that morning?

Have they reimbursed your expenses?

ronpickering

eskbanker said:

ronpickering said:
So I am now invite to give final passenger comments so any help/advice would be appreciated.

It looks to me that they have a fairly compelling case that extraordinary circumstances prevented the aircraft from flying from BER to MAN the night before, so that effectively moves the conversation on to whether they took all reasonable measures to mitigate that.

Their boilerplate 'intolerable sacrifice' response to that appears to be effectively saying 'we can't have standby aircraft and crews everywhere', which is a strawman - the question is whether it's reasonable to expect them to be able to rustle up a spare (crewed) plane to operate the BCN-MAN flight the next morning, so I'd ask them to demonstrate clearly why this wasn't practical, assuming they haven't already covered that elsewhere within their response, i.e. where were all their spares deployed that morning?

Have they reimbursed your expenses?

Thanks so much again for your help and advice, I've pasted a significant chunk of the rest of their reasoning below.  After this they then cover rerouting options referring to their obligations in these situations citing links on their app for passengers to arrange overnight accommodation etc....we received two emails, one informing us of the cancellation and one informing us of the rearranged flight details and that they would be in touch to sort out accommodation for us...we never received any further correspondence. I did ring their customer service number to be greeted by a brusque, fairly rude individual who didn't help us (which was cited in one of the emails to them and acknowledged in response).  Thus we had to sort out everything ourselves.

Yes they did reimburse the majority of our expenses albeit they weren't prepared to pay for  a few beers with two meals we had totalling about 40 euros as it was not deemed reasonable expenses 🙄.


Please note that had easyJet not cancelled the first wave flights, these flights would havesuffered an unavoidable delay in excess of 8 hours, causing the crew to reach their legal working hours. In addition the delay would have caused cancellations to rotation MAN-HRGMAN. In this scenario, approximately 744 passengers would have been disrupted versus the 372 passengers which were disrupted as a result of easyJet decision to cancel. To not pre-cancel rotation MAN-BCN-MAN would be against the objectives of the Regulation which primary aim is the reduction of trouble and inconvenience to passengers.21. It is inevitable that in the circumstances, some flights would be disrupted and there is nothing that easyJet could do to avoid the disruption to the Flight.

 It follows that, in light of the widespread disruption that had already materialised that day, it would not have been reasonable and proportionate to leave the first wave flight operating, cancel them at last moment and then cause a further snowball effect and cancellations the last wave flights of the day, leading to disruption to flights on 28 September 2025.22. The following excerpt of the Daily Operations Review from the Flight Date highlights the hot spots and disruptive events on 26-27 September 2025:823. Here is more information about the disruption affecting BER airport:9https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/disruptions-drag-berlin-airport-aftercyberattack-2025-09-24/https://en.ypagency.net/37059110https://www.aviation24.be/airports/berlin/berlin-airport-begins-gradual-recovery-after-cyber-attackon-collins-aerospace/24. Had it not been for the non-easyJet IT outage in BER on the Previous Date resulting in the Aircraft being left out of its base, the Flight would have, in all likelihood, been able to operate as per the schedule.WHAT OPTIONS WERE AVAILABLE TO EASYJET IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES?25.

The options available to the Airline when faced with disruption were the following: Use of standby crew and aircraft 26. Please note that there were no standby aircraft available in the network by the time of the Flight disruption:11Overnight delay the flight27. easyJet would have to suffer an intolerable sacrifice of having to slot the flight into the programme the following day – in order to do this standby crew and spare aircraft will need to be utilised, or ‘shuffle’ the scheduled programme, a new flight plan would need to be filed and approved by Eurocontrol for the departure, ground crew would have to organise an additional flight to handle the passengers, bags, fuel etc. and will come at a high cost to easyJet.Cancel the flight 28. In order to accommodate for the severe delay to the Aircraft, easyJet had no alternative but to cancel the Flight. The measure taken was clearly appropriate to the situation and given the level of disruption to the airline flying programme, there were no other viable measures that could have been taken in the circumstances.LEGAL PRINCIPLESEXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES29. In respect of extraordinary circumstances, we rely on Recital 15 of the Regulation which states as follows:“Extraordinary circumstances should be deemed to exist where the impact of an air traffic management decision in relation to a particular aircraft on a particular day gives rise to a long delay, an overnight delay, or the cancellation of one of more flights by that aircraft, even though all reasonable measures had been taken by the air carrier concerned to avoid the delays or cancellations.” [Emphasis added]30. This Recital was considered in great detail by the Court of Appeal in Daniel Blanche v easyJet Airline Company Limited [2019] EWCA Civ 69. In its judgment, the Court unanimously 12determined that an air traffic management decision (or “ATMD”), which causes the cancellation or long delay of a flight, is an extraordinary circumstance for the purposes of Regulation and that it is not necessary to consider the underlying reason(s) for an ATMD.31. In light of this, the Airline submits that the disruption to the Flight was caused by extraordinary circumstances.REASONABLE MEASURES32. In Eglitis v Latvijas Republikas Ekonomikas Ministrija (Case C-294/10) the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “CJEU”) held that, while Article 5(3) includes a provision which requires carriers to use all reasonable measures to avoid the disruption of flights, that provision is limited to ensure that it "does not result in the air carrier being led to make intolerable sacrifices in the light of the capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time".33.

Furthermore, in Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia (Case C-549/07) the CJEU held that reasonable measures must be “appropriate to the situation, that is to say measures which are, at the time those extraordinary circumstances arise, meet, inter alia, conditions which are technically and economically viable to the air carrier concerned”.34. The Airline took all reasonable measures to avoid disruption by having spare aircraft and crew within our network and utilising these assets as required to minimise the disruption. It would be economically unviable for easyJet to maintain fully crewed redundant aircraft at each and every airport to which it operates to or from, in sufficient number to cover any number of potential disruptions. Save for having an unlimited amount of spare aircraft and crew at all airports, an option which would amount to an “intolerable sacrifice” given the disproportionate cost involved, the disruption that materialised could not be avoided.35. Accordingly, the Airline’s maintains that the measures taken were appropriate to the situation and those that were technically and economically viable at the time and which mitigated the inconvenience to the Passenger(s) as best as possible in the circumstances. There were no other reasonable measures which could have been taken to avoid the cause of the disruption to the flight or the disruption itself.

easyJet has a Fleet / Crew Optimisation and Allocation Team who are responsible for managing the assignment of aircraft to activities, and this includes ensuring that the necessary resilience is provided to the operation. This is to ensure that the airline has sufficient resources available at its disposal on a day-to-day basis in order to mitigate and manage normal levels of disruption in peak summer periods.37. easyJet’s general policy is to ensure that any delay, disruption and inconvenience to passengers are minimised as much as possible, and in line with that policy, easyJet take reasonable contingency precautions by ensuring that it has a proportionate number of spare aircraft and crew available within its network. easyJet aims to have a minimum of 1 standby aircraft for every 20 – 25 aircraft within its fleet. These aircraft are generally stationed throughout easyJet’s primary aircraft bases including London Luton Airport (“LTN”), London Gatwick Airport (“LGW”), Milan Malpensa Airport (“MXP”), Berlin Schönefeld Airport (“SXF”), Geneva Airport (“GVA”) and Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport (“CDG”).

This minimum standby aircraft plan is not always achievable on a day-to-day basis due to overarching effects of ongoing, cumulative and unforeseeable disruption within the network (e.g. the impact of industrial action / air traffic control restrictions on crew hours). The underlying cost of maintaining these resources equates to approximately £15 – 18 million per annum (not including engineering and maintenance costs). At the relevant time, easyJet planned to have 1 standby aircraft for every 30 aircraft within its fleet which equated to approximately 6 spare aircraft within the network.38. easyJet also has crew bases in multiple locations throughout Europe. easyJet aims to have a minimum level of crew standby resources at its disposal on a day-to-day basis. This minimum crewing standby resource is calculated to equate to approximately 21% of the total crew network (e.g. for every 100 Captains undertaking flying duties easyJet will have 21 standby Captains available within its network).

The underlying cost of maintaining these resources equates to approximately £70 – 80 million per annum.39. As is the case with standby aircraft, this minimum standby crew plan is not always achievable on a day-to-day basis due to overarching effects of ongoing, cumulative and unforeseeable disruption within the network (e.g. the impact of industrial action / air traffic control restrictions on crew hours.

eskbanker

ronpickering said:
The options available to the Airline when faced with disruption were the following:

Use of standby crew and aircraft

26. Please note that there were no standby aircraft available in the network by the time of the Flight disruption

Overnight delay the flight

27. easyJet would have to suffer an intolerable sacrifice of having to slot the flight into the programme the following day – in order to do this standby crew and spare aircraft will need to be utilised, or ‘shuffle’ the scheduled programme, a new flight plan would need to be filed and approved by Eurocontrol for the departure, ground crew would have to organise an additional flight to handle the passengers, bags, fuel etc. and will come at a high cost to easyJet.

Cancel the flight

28. In order to accommodate for the severe delay to the Aircraft, easyJet had no alternative but to cancel the Flight. The measure taken was clearly appropriate to the situation and given the level of disruption to the airline flying programme, there were no other viable measures that could have been taken in the circumstances.

[...]

At the relevant time, easyJet planned to have 1 standby aircraft for every 30 aircraft within its fleet which equated to approximately 6 spare aircraft within the network.38. easyJet also has crew bases in multiple locations throughout Europe. easyJet aims to have a minimum level of crew standby resources at its disposal on a day-to-day basis. This minimum crewing standby resource is calculated to equate to approximately 21% of the total crew network (e.g. for every 100 Captains undertaking flying duties easyJet will have 21 standby Captains available within its network).

I've dropped the extraneous stuff and added some line breaks for legibility - to me they don't make it clear exactly why there were no standby aircraft available in enough time for your flight (as opposed to during disruption the previous day), so not unreasonable to ask IMHO, but I imagine they'll find a credible explanation, so don't build your hopes up if you choose to pursue this further!

ronpickering said:
Yes they did reimburse the majority of our expenses albeit they weren't prepared to pay for  a few beers with two meals we had totalling about 40 euros as it was not deemed reasonable expenses 🙄.

It's not uncommon for airlines not to reimburse alcohol when funding meals, BA are the same, for example.

ronpickering

eskbanker said:

ronpickering said:
The options available to the Airline when faced with disruption were the following:

Use of standby crew and aircraft

26. Please note that there were no standby aircraft available in the network by the time of the Flight disruption

Overnight delay the flight

27. easyJet would have to suffer an intolerable sacrifice of having to slot the flight into the programme the following day – in order to do this standby crew and spare aircraft will need to be utilised, or ‘shuffle’ the scheduled programme, a new flight plan would need to be filed and approved by Eurocontrol for the departure, ground crew would have to organise an additional flight to handle the passengers, bags, fuel etc. and will come at a high cost to easyJet.

Cancel the flight

28. In order to accommodate for the severe delay to the Aircraft, easyJet had no alternative but to cancel the Flight. The measure taken was clearly appropriate to the situation and given the level of disruption to the airline flying programme, there were no other viable measures that could have been taken in the circumstances.

[...]

At the relevant time, easyJet planned to have 1 standby aircraft for every 30 aircraft within its fleet which equated to approximately 6 spare aircraft within the network.38. easyJet also has crew bases in multiple locations throughout Europe. easyJet aims to have a minimum level of crew standby resources at its disposal on a day-to-day basis. This minimum crewing standby resource is calculated to equate to approximately 21% of the total crew network (e.g. for every 100 Captains undertaking flying duties easyJet will have 21 standby Captains available within its network).

I've dropped the extraneous stuff and added some line breaks for legibility - to me they don't make it clear exactly why there were no standby aircraft available in enough time for your flight (as opposed to during disruption the previous day), so not unreasonable to ask IMHO, but I imagine they'll find a credible explanation, so don't build your hopes up if you choose to pursue this further!

ronpickering said:
Yes they did reimburse the majority of our expenses albeit they weren't prepared to pay for  a few beers with two meals we had totalling about 40 euros as it was not deemed reasonable expenses 🙄.

It's not uncommon for airlines not to reimburse alcohol when funding meals, BA are the same, for example.

Thanks Eskbanker, will send my final comments and see how it goes.

Appreciate all your help.