Passengers travelling from Mexico to Copenhagen arrived with a total delay of approximately three days. The airline had already paid EUR 600 in compensation per passenger for the disruption. The passengers claimed they were entitled to additional compensation because, in their view, the original flight was cancelled, and their rebooked flight was then also delayed. To support this, the passengers provided evidence that the flight was registered as cancelled on the airport information boards. The airline maintained that the flight had never been cancelled and that there had been only one long delay.
The court sided with the airline and found that the passengers had experienced one long delay, not a cancellation followed by a delayed rebooked flight. The court based the decision on the airline’s operational logs. The timeline showed that the passengers were never transferred to a flight planned independently of the original flight. The court therefore held that the compensation already paid satisfied the passengers’ entitlement under the Regulation.
iuno’s opinion
This case is a practical illustration of how important the distinction between cancellation and delay is. Even when a disruption lasts several days, that does not in itself mean that there has been both a cancellation and a new, separately compensable flight.
The decision is also a useful reminder that the legal classification of a flight disruption depends on the objective circumstances of the operation, not only on how the flight may have appeared on airport displays or third-party flight tracking services.
The decision also supports the principle reflected in the European Court of Justice’s joined cases C-402/07 and C-432/07 (Sturgeon), namely that a cancellation followed by re-routing requires that the passengers are transferred to a flight planned independently of the delayed flight.
It also highlights the evidential importance of operational records. At iuno, we recommend that airlines ensure that disruption files are preserved in a way that clearly documents the operational sequence of decisions.
If you wish to discuss this case and the effects on your operations, our Aviation team is happy to help.
[Decision of the Copenhagen City Court of 29 May 2024, case BS-36234/2021-KBH]