JPears wrote: »
I'm sorry but I believe this to be complete BS. Just because a contract states terms and conditions and you "agree" to it, doesn't make it lawful or override basic EU law.
If a mugger approaches you with a T shirt on saying I'm going to mug you and steal your money, doesn't make it lawful for him to do so!
romanby1 wrote: »
Re:- dxc_chappie, JPears and goodwithmoney101 posts above, Claims based on (EC) 261/2004 are compensation and not damages.
The Limitation Act 1980 Article 9 applies:-Time limit for actions for sums recoverable by statute.(1)An action to recover any sum recoverable by virtue of any enactment shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.(EC) 261/2004 is Statute Law enacted by the EU Parliament.
As far as the airlines who continue to spout the M.C. 2 year rule, the above needs to be rammed down their throats.
Mark2spark wrote: »
Yes, what if RA put in their T & C's that passengers accept that no food or drink will be available for a minimum of 5 hours if you are boarded and awaiting a landing slot to be given, before departure.
It would be against the law.
blondmark wrote: »
The point is certainly arguable. It is a fact that Regulation No 261/2004 contains no provision fixing a time-limit for bringing actions to enforce the rights guaranteed by that regulation - that time limit was confirmed somewhere else - specifically in More v KLM. This factor, in my opinion, is what mislead the Judge into erring in his decision to allow the Ryanair term to prevail.
Careful analysis is required of the words: 'pursuant to this regulation'. Had the judge taken the time to analyse whether or not the airline's obligations vis-à-vis its passengers pursuant to regulation 261/2004 includes paying compensation for severe delay where a claim is brought within 6 years, and as a matter of fact and of law that is the airline's obligation (in the absence of ECs), the outcome would have been quite different. If he accepts this much, Ryanair's restrictive term in purporting to limit this obligation to just 2 years is insupportable.
Article 15 of 26/2004 states: "Obligations vis-à-vis passengers pursuant to this Regulation may not be limited or waived, notably by a derogation or restrictive clause in the contract of carriage." Of course any time limit does not have to be expressly set out in the regulation to be one of the obligations pursuant to the regulation.
jsmac wrote: »
I submitted the European Small Claims Procedure Form A to my local County Court in April 2013. The form was sent to Ryanair several days later. Apparently, they had 30 days to respond, however they have chosen to ignore the Court's request for evidence.
I am now wondering what I am supposed to do. The Court has told me to get legal advice but I thought that the whole point of using the County Court is to avoid having to use solicitors. It seems completely crazy that Ryanair can simply ignore the Court!
Any thoughts or advice would be greatly appreciated.
It will rise to 1.40% from June
Show us the prizes you've won recently
Via app. Selected May dates