Huzar appeal

JPears

Hmm, no news of the leave to appeal refusal on les deux oiseaux website.....

NoviceAngel

It's eerily quiet, I don't think Jet2 have made a statement yet, I emailed deux oiseaux on Friday, asking for their position in relation to my 'stayed' case, no response as yet. I suspect there will be some hurriedly arranged high level meetings taking place today......

Mark2spark

I had to laugh at Thomsons press release, saying that they were 'surprised' at the SC's decision to throw out the leave to appeal, and that they *still* consider their position to be legally sound.
What on earth will it take for the penny to drop?

Time to sack that 'pre eminent QC' I think

NoviceAngel

Mark2spark wrote: »

they were 'surprised' at the SC's decision to throw out the leave to appeal, and that they *still* consider their position to be legally sound

In my case Jet2 are considering their position, I await a further communication for a court hearing date, or jet2 get their cheque book out, to be fair it will take a bit of time for the CEO's office to authorise payments to cases currently in the court system, I and a thousands of others... I guess will have to be patient.......

Vauban

NoviceAngel wrote: »

In my case Jet2 are considering their position, I await a further communication for a court hearing date, or jet2 get their cheque book out, to be fair it will take a bit of time for the CEO's office to authorise payments to cases currently in the court system, I and a thousands of others... I guess will have to be patient.......

To be honest, it shouldn't require a decision from the CEO's office to adhere to UK law. Call me an old fashioned booby, but I tend to think that is rather a given?

NoviceAngel

Let's hope so Vauban...

Haven't they put 17 million to one side for all of us on MSE??

I don't agree with JP my cheque is in the post.. :j

batman44

Interesting artical in the guardian, comment from Bott & Co-

The specialist air compensation lawyers Bott & Co - which acted for the two passengers at the Supreme Court - said it has written to the 13 airlines calling on them to now pay existing claims. It has 14,000 claims that were awaiting the ruling.
Bott has also written to Luton, Liverpool and Manchester county courts asking them to consider striking out all stayed defences, or to relist them for hearings. “The judgments mean the airlines should pay, but it does not necessarily mean they will,” a spokeswoman for the firm said. “They should have been paying for the last two years but they have continued to dispute the law and there is no guarantee they will now acknowledge their obligations. What these judgments mean is that if you issue court proceedings, the court should be with you and you should obtain a judgment against the airline.”

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/nov/06/compensation-claims-flights-delayed-paid:T

richardw

I think a judge should fine an airline a substantial amount for unreasonable behaviour.

legal_magpie

The Judge can't "fine" the airlines but can make an order that a party should pay higher costs if they have behaved unreasonably. Asking for cases to be stayed pending the outcome of the appeals wouldn't come into this category but some examples of what might be could include (these are my personal views and shouldn't be taken to be legally conclusive)


(1) Continuing to fight the case notwithstanding the Supreme Court Judgment and losing hopelessly
(2) Denying that someone was on the flight and thus requiring them to attend Court and give evidence to that effect and conceding the point on the day. (This happened in my case)
(3) Conceding the case on the day in circumstances where you have fully prepared for the hearing.
(4) Failing to comply with the Court's directions on more than one occasion.

jezmyers

for info, this is Wizzair's current position;

[FONT=&quot]"We have received an official response from the legal department that the decision in the Huzar case cannot be binding in every case when the delay or cancellation of a flight was caused by a technical problem, because technical problems may vary. I regret to inform you that we are still unable to pay the requested compensation."[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]