Ryanair Flight Moved Forward 4hr 45

Noelman105

UPDATE: I contacted the EU website for aviation consumer rights and this was the response I got:

” Thank you for contacting the Europe Direct Contact Centre. 

A flight must be regarded as having been ‘cancelled’ under Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 in the case where the operating air carrier brings that flight forward by more than one hour. In that case, the operating air carrier cannot reduce any compensation to be paid by 50% on the ground that it has offered the passenger re-routing, allowing him or her to arrive without delay at his or her final destination.

Under EU law (Regulation (EC) No 261/2004:), if your flight is cancelled, you are entitled to:

a)    Assistance by the airline while waiting (phone calls, refreshments, meals, accommodation and transportation to the place of accommodation, if necessary).

b)    on a one-off basis, a choice between:

i)     reimbursement of the full cost of the unused ticket segments (and in the case of a connecting flight, a return flight to the airport of departure at the earliest opportunity);

ii)   re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to your final destination at the earliest opportunity; or

iii)  re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to your final destination at a later date at your convenience, subject to the availability of seats.

You can only choose one of these three options under b).

c)    compensation, unless you were informed of the cancellation at least 2 weeks before the scheduled departure date. The airline must prove if and when you were personally informed that the flight was cancelled. The compensation varies between EUR 250 and EUR 600 depending on the length of the flight and the length of delay compared to the scheduled arrival time of the original flight.

If the airline has offered to re-route you and you reach your final destination with a delay of 2, 3 or 4 hours after the originally scheduled time of arrival, the compensation may be reduced by 50 %.

Compensation is also not due if the airline can prove that the cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided if all reasonable measures had been taken.”

Sorry, I know it’s long winded but from that I get I’m not entitled to compensation (which I didn’t want anyway) but I am entitled to a full refund. 

*I had to cut out the link in order to post 

mdann52

bagand96 said:

It's not widely accepted or applied that a schedule change triggers refund rights other than the 5 hours mentioned in EC261, which is what Ryanair apply in their T&C's. Other airlines have their own rules which may be less than 5 hours. 

The effect of the AzurAir case is, under EU261, a flight moved forward by more than 1 hour triggers all the rights under EU261 for rerouting and refunds. The exact quote:

Article 2(l) and Article 5(1) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that a flight is regarded as having been ‘cancelled’ in the case where the operating air carrier brings that flight forward by more than one hour.

However, getting this applied in court in the UK is going to be difficult until Lipton is done in the Supreme Court.

What the Europe Direct Contact Centre is irrelevant for a Ryanair UK flight leaving a UK airport, as these flights do not fall under EU261, so European rules may or may not be applicable.

bagand96

mdann52 said:

bagand96 said:

It's not widely accepted or applied that a schedule change triggers refund rights other than the 5 hours mentioned in EC261, which is what Ryanair apply in their T&C's. Other airlines have their own rules which may be less than 5 hours. 

The effect of the AzurAir case is, under EU261, a flight moved forward by more than 1 hour triggers all the rights under EU261 for rerouting and refunds. The exact quote:

Article 2(l) and Article 5(1) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that a flight is regarded as having been ‘cancelled’ in the case where the operating air carrier brings that flight forward by more than one hour.

However, getting this applied in court in the UK is going to be difficult until Lipton is done in the Supreme Court.

What the Europe Direct Contact Centre is irrelevant for a Ryanair UK flight leaving a UK airport, as these flights do not fall under EU261, so European rules may or may not be applicable.

If the flight is operated by Ryanair DAC (FR flight number) then being Irish, they are an EU carrier so they should apply EC261 and any EU judgements. Although enforcing that from the UK may prove very hard.

If it's a Ryanair UK operated flight (RK flight number) then that will be harder and as you say be an issue waiting to see whether EC judgements after Brexit Withdrawal Agreement are adopted in UK law. 

eskbanker

mdann52 said:

currently Lipton v BA CityFlyer is in court to decide on the framework of applying EU judgement to UK laws.

Doesn't Lipton v BA CityFlyer simply consider this from the perspective of the applicability of pre-Brexit EU judgments pertaining to retained legislation, rather than those made subsequently (such as the Azurair one)?

Hoenir

RyanAir provide a link to a refund here. 

https://help.ryanair.com/hc/en-gb/categories/12488242270609-Cancelled-Rescheduled-Flights

Under Rescheduled Flight

mdann52

eskbanker said:

mdann52 said:

currently Lipton v BA CityFlyer is in court to decide on the framework of applying EU judgement to UK laws.

Doesn't Lipton v BA CityFlyer simply consider this from the perspective of the applicability of pre-Brexit EU judgments pertaining to retained legislation, rather than those made subsequently (such as the Azurair one)?

I'm getting off topic here I will admit!

The original High Court hearing, and particularly the section by Lord Justice Green, discussed a framework for applying ex-EU case law - and this framework was a large part of the oral hearing at the Supreme Court, particularly with the amendments made post-Brexit to incorporate existing EU case law into the regulations.
The concept of "post-transition case law" came under some discussion if I remember correctly - which the Azurair judgement is a good example of, as it modifies case law that has been directly inserted into UK legislation.