Cancelled tickets resulted in denied boarding
Usually, an air carrier has to pay compensation if they refuse to let passengers board a flight. However, in a recent case, the court ruled that three refused passengers were not entitled to compensation because their flight tickets had been cancelled. The court reached this conclusion despite it being unclear who had cancelled the tickets and how.
Three passengers were supposed to fly from Athens to Copenhagen. The air carrier refused to let them board because their tickets had been cancelled.
The passengers maintained that they had not cancelled their tickets. However, the air carrier's system showed that the passengers - or someone with access to their booking - had cancelled the tickets.
Mystery unsolved
The court decided that there was insufficient evidence to support the existence of a boarding refusal within the meaning of Regulation 261/2004. There was no proof that the air carrier was responsible for cancelling the flight tickets. The case never resulted in a clear explanation for who had carried out the cancellation and how.
IUNO's opinion
This case demonstrates that the regulation does not cover a boarding refusal if the passenger's booking has been cancelled. It also shows that the burden of proof of a valid ticket lies with the passenger. The responsibility will generally lie with the passenger if a ticket is cancelled.
IUNO recommends that air carriers ensure they have clear evidence of the passenger's cancellation, including precise logging of entries in the air carrier's systems. This will reduce the risk of unreasonable claims for compensation in cases where a passenger is denied boarding due to a cancelled flight ticket.
[The court of Frederiksberg's judgment of 20 December 2023 in case BS-31425/2022-FRB]
Three passengers were supposed to fly from Athens to Copenhagen. The air carrier refused to let them board because their tickets had been cancelled.
The passengers maintained that they had not cancelled their tickets. However, the air carrier's system showed that the passengers - or someone with access to their booking - had cancelled the tickets.
Mystery unsolved
The court decided that there was insufficient evidence to support the existence of a boarding refusal within the meaning of Regulation 261/2004. There was no proof that the air carrier was responsible for cancelling the flight tickets. The case never resulted in a clear explanation for who had carried out the cancellation and how.
IUNO's opinion
This case demonstrates that the regulation does not cover a boarding refusal if the passenger's booking has been cancelled. It also shows that the burden of proof of a valid ticket lies with the passenger. The responsibility will generally lie with the passenger if a ticket is cancelled.
IUNO recommends that air carriers ensure they have clear evidence of the passenger's cancellation, including precise logging of entries in the air carrier's systems. This will reduce the risk of unreasonable claims for compensation in cases where a passenger is denied boarding due to a cancelled flight ticket.
[The court of Frederiksberg's judgment of 20 December 2023 in case BS-31425/2022-FRB]
Similar
The team

Aage
Krogh
Partner
Adam
Harding Ryyd Lange
Junior legal advisor
Albert
Berg Giese
Legal assistant
Albert
Vestergaard Mogensen
Junior legal assistant
Amalie
Bjerre Hilmand
Senior legal advisor
Anna
Bonander
Legal advisor
Anna
Ferguson Bille-Biggart
Junior legal advisor
Anna
Kreutzmann
Legal manager
Anna
Laura Brohl Larsen
Legal assistant
Anne
Voigt Kjær
Senior legal assistant
Anton
Winther Hansen
Senior legal advisor
Ashley
Kristine Morton
Senior legal advisor
Asla
Tui Casey Belusa
Junior legal assistant
Aurora
Maria Thunes Truyen
Associate
Bror
Johan Kristensen
Senior legal advisor
Caroline
Sofie Urup Malmstrøm
Senior legal assistant
Chris
Anders Nielsen
Senior legal advisor
Cille
Fahnø
Legal advisor
Clara
Caballero Stephensen
Junior legal advisor
Daniela
Zaragoza-Schultz
Junior legal assistant
Ea
Tingkær Hesselfeldt
Legal assistant
Ellen
Priess-Hansen
Junior legal advisor
Elvira
Feline Basse Schougaard
Senior legal advisor
Ema
Besic-Ahmetagic
Legal advisor
Emilie
Mehl Bagger
Legal assistant
Emily
Mortensen
Junior legal assistant
Feline
Honoré Jepsen
Legal assistant
Frederikke
Østerlund Haarder
Senior legal assistant
Freja
Pedersen
Legal assistant
Frida
Assarson
Associate
Gustav
Vestergaard
Senior legal assistant
Holger
Koch-Klarskov
Legal advisor
Ian
Englev Jensen
Legal assistant
Ida
Marie Skovgaard Rubæk
Senior legal manager
Isabella
Fjording
Legal assistant
Izabell
Celina Bastrup Lüthje
Senior legal assistant
Johanne
Alberte Liljeborg
Junior legal advisor
Julia
Wolfe
Legal advisor
Kaisa
Maria Falkenberg Lending
Junior legal advisor
Kaisa
Nova Ordell Guldbrand Thygaard
Senior legal advisor
Karl Emil
Tang Nielsen
Senior legal assistant
Karoline
Halfdan Petersen
Senior legal manager
Kateryna
Buriak
Legal advisor
Laura
Jørgensen
Senior legal advisor
Luna
Bennesen
Legal assistant
Marie
Møller Christensen
Legal advisor
Mathias
Bech Linaa
Senior legal advisor
Mathias
Rex Brohus
Legal assistant
Mathilde
Bjørn Bjerring
Legal assistant
Mathilde
Stenderup
Legal assistant
Maya
Cecillia Jørgensen
Senior legal advisor
Merle
Frisendahl Fog
Legal assistant
Mie
Lundberg Larsen
Legal advisor
Najat
Ibrahim
Junior legal assistant
Nourchaine
Sellami
Legal advisor
Rosa
Gilliam-Vigh
Legal advisor
Selma
Agopian
Senior Associate, EU-advokat
Selma
Klinker Brodersen
Legal advisor
Silja
Brünnich Fogh von Deden
Senior legal assistant
Silje
Moen Knutsen
Legal advisor
Simon
Saaby-Lamer
Junior legal assistant
Thilde
Zwicki Meulengracht
Junior legal assistant
Victoria
Mai Gregaard Handberg
Legal advisor