Any definition of 'intolerable sacrifice'?

samtheman1k

I'm mid review with ADR on a cancelled EJ flight.  In short, a flight was delayed, meaning that the subsequent flight would of been grounded until the following day at the destination due to a night curfew.  

EJ are claiming that this means the following day's schedule is disrupted, resulting in 'intolerable sacrifice'.  

Inconvenient, expensive, perhaps...but intolerable?  Is there any formal definition of that?  

I would argue that by cancelling my flight instead of the subsequent flight, they've already caused 'intolerable sacrifice', so therefore shouldn't be able to say it's ok on one flight, but not another?

Anyone got any experience of this?  

eskbanker

The wording is taken from the judgment in the 2008 Wallentin v Alitalia case:

That party must establish that, even if it had deployed all its resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposal, it would clearly not have been able – unless it had made intolerable sacrifices in the light of the capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time – to prevent the extraordinary circumstances with which it was confronted from leading to the cancellation of the flight

so doesn't relate to causing the passenger intolerable sacrifice but is intended to cap what's perceived as reasonable in the context of what the airline could/should have done to mitigate the extraordinary circumstances.  As with so much of the debate about extraordinary circumstances, there's little in the way of formal definitions and instead it's incumbent on passengers (and legal representatives) to construct arguments around legal precedents and their applicability to specific circumstances....

samtheman1k

Thanks, makes sense!