Compensation for Emirates Delays after Flooding in Dubai

Old.Bonezee

I was flying Stansted to Brisbane via Dubai on Emirates. My outborund flight was delayed by 4hrs, and hence I missed the (delayed) connecting flight in Dubai by 30 mins. I was rebooked on to an alternate flight the following morning, which was cancelled after numerous 2 hr delays. My final arrival in Brisbane was over 34hrs later than my original schedule. Emirates cited technical issues for the delay after catastrophic flooding in Dubai. So my question relates to compensation under The Air Passenger Rights and Air Travel Organisers' Licensing (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019. 
Whilst Emirates will likely claim force majeure due to exceptional circumstances, they knew about these exceptional circumstances and could have cancelled all incoming flights to Dubai before my departure from London Stansted, the day after the flooding occurred. Instead, they made a commercial decision not to cancel incoming flights, despite the knowledge that they would not be able to deal with the 3000+ passengers and baggage caught up in Dubai as a result. Even before my departure flight from Stansted, passengers had already been stuck in Dubai for one or two nights with no news on when they would get a connecting flight out, and Emirates were understandably unable to provide alternative accomodation for the vast majority of these passengers.
They could have avoided much of the disruption by cancelling all inbound flights until they had cleared passengers and baggage from those passengers stuck in Dubai airport in the immediate aftermath of the flood.
So, if Emirates deny my claim, will it be worth taking follow-up action through the CAA,and legal action through the courts if the CAA are also unsuccessful? Anyone on here with legal expertise that can offer their thoughts? Much apprciated, TIA.

mdann52

The problem is that your connecting flight was still operating at the time of you leaving Stansted, so in my mind it was reasonable to keep you going.

I don't think this is eligible for UK261 compensation, are are on the hook for Duty of Care expenses still however.

On the alternative, you could have asked Emirates to reroute you on another airline avoiding Dubai prior to leaving the UK. I think, unfortunately, this will just have to be chalked up to experience and you can just claim expenses.

Ayr_Rage

Airlines don't just cancel all flights, they need their aircraft and staff in the right place for the next rotation.

As the situation in Dubai was an almost once in a lifetime weather event don't hold your expectations too high.

Voyager2002

Since your flight out of Stansted was the day after the flooding, they might struggle to prove that it was due to "exceptional circumstances". So a claim for delay compensation on that basis just might succeed.

Your extended delay was very clearly because of the flooding, and so compensation is unlikely to be available. However, if you ask nicely Emirates might give you a few Skywards points as a token of good-will.

eskbanker

Old.Bonezee said:

I was flying Stansted to Brisbane via Dubai on Emirates. My outborund flight was delayed by 4hrs, and hence I missed the (delayed) connecting flight in Dubai by 30 mins. I was rebooked on to an alternate flight the following morning, which was cancelled after numerous 2 hr delays. My final arrival in Brisbane was over 34hrs later than my original schedule. Emirates cited technical issues for the delay after catastrophic flooding in Dubai.

An odd rationale, I'd have thought it would either be technical issues (usually the airline's responsibility) or weather (not their liability) - was there any more specific wording than that?

icuras

Hi, you’re all looking at the wrong information! 

Try Montreal convention article 19, and CAA CAP 2155. These can be found on the internet. 

eskbanker

icuras said:

Hi, you’re all looking at the wrong information! 

Try Montreal convention article 19, and CAA CAP 2155. These can be found on the internet. 

This thread has been dormant for over a year and a half, but care to show your workings, in terms of exactly how the Montreal Convention would offer a route to compensation (as opposed to reimbursement of incurred expenses) in this scenario, given its similar 'all reasonable measures' exemption?

Pollycat

icuras said:

Hi, you’re all looking at the wrong information! 

Try Montreal convention article 19, and CAA CAP 2155. These can be found on the internet. 

NECROPOST

Old thread.

eskbanker

Pollycat said:

icuras said:

Hi, you’re all looking at the wrong information! 

Try Montreal convention article 19, and CAA CAP 2155. These can be found on the internet. 

NECROPOST

Old thread.

Not sure it's particularly useful to post such a shouty and curt dismissal, when it had already been pointed out yesterday that this is an old thread?  Granted, it's relatively unusual for such thread resuscitations by new posters to be productive but in this case it seemed worth ascertaining if they were bringing something useful to the party (not necessarily for OP but other readers), as the Montreal Convention is rarely discussed on this board, although the style might suggest AI/bot so it wouldn't be a massive surprise if the poster didn't return....

Pollycat

eskbanker said:

Pollycat said:

icuras said:

Hi, you’re all looking at the wrong information! 

Try Montreal convention article 19, and CAA CAP 2155. These can be found on the internet. 

NECROPOST

Old thread.

Not sure it's particularly useful to post such a shouty and curt dismissal, when it had already been pointed out yesterday that this is an old thread?  Granted, it's relatively unusual for such thread resuscitations by new posters to be productive but in this case it seemed worth ascertaining if they were bringing something useful to the party (not necessarily for OP but other readers), as the Montreal Convention is rarely discussed on this board, although the style might suggest AI/bot so it wouldn't be a massive surprise if the poster didn't return....

IMHO necroposting results in posters wasting their time answering questions from people who've long left MSE.
It's looked down on on a lot of public fora.

The 'shouty' dismissal was not to icuras.
It was to warn other people that it was an old, dormant thread.
As for 'curt', my post said everything necessary.

That poster has posted the same thing on another old, long dormant thread.

icuras

Hi, the reason for posting this now is that I have had success with my claim through the Small Claims Track. Obviously I have to be careful about what I reveal in public. 

If you research the above references, you should be able to find out what the Airline needs to offer you if your flight is delayed. There are 3 options. CAP 2155 details the process the airlines should follow. This information simplifies EU261. Were you contacted by the airline and offered any advice or alternative options? 

The Montreal Convention is the highest legal authority for airline travel, and therefore sets the standard. Article 19 provides a way to seek compensation, but can bee a little difficult to understand, so perhaps using google to help you understand it, could be a way forward. 

The comments from those that replied to my post perhaps should have read the publications I mentioned before casting doubt on my post.