EN
Aviation

Technical errors: Claims should still be stayed

logo
Legal news
calendar 23 April 2015
globus Denmark

IUNO have asked the District Court of Copenhagen to stay a great number of cases on delays and cancellations caused by technical errors. We are pleased to report, that the District Court has just decided to stay two of our pending cases on technical errors while waiting for the High Court. Thus, our recommendation remains that all cases on technical errors shall be petitioned to be stayed.

As we described in our newsletter of 4 March 2015, four Danish Eastern High Court cases (the so-called Primera cases) regarding compensation for delay have been appealed to the Danish Supreme Court. It is expected that these Supreme Court judgements will provide some guidance as to when a technical error under Danish law can be considered an extraordinary circumstance, exempting airlines from the obligation to pay compensation to delayed passengers.

Four cases have been stayed

As a consequence of this Supreme Court appeal, the District Court of Copenhagen gave an interlocutory order staying four cases until the Supreme Court has given their ruling. Thus, it seems that the District Court of Copenhagen is of the opinion that cases with at least some similarity to the Primera cases should await the Supreme Court in order to secure an equal of treatment. We agree.

The passengers' countermove has been to request for an appeal against this interlocutory order to stay the cases. We have just been informed that the request for an appeal has been approved, which means that the High Court shall decide on the question of whether cases regarding technical errors should be stayed while we wait for a judgement from the Supreme Court.

Our reaction

IUNO have asked the District Court of Copenhagen to stay a great number of our cases on delays and cancellations caused by technical errors – at least until the High Court has decided on the appeal case of the interlocutory order. Since it is expected that the Supreme Court ruling will provide an interpretation giving guidance on the categorization of technical errors as extraordinary circumstances, our opinion is that pending cases on technical errors should await this interpretation in order to secure equality before the law.

We have just seen the first two decisions from the District Court.

We are pleased to report that the District Court ruled in favour of the airline in both cases.

Thus, the District Court decided that both cases should be stayed; at least until the High Court has decided on the appeal case of the interlocutory order as mentioned above.

At this point, the legal area of passenger rights is to some extent in a standby position, as everyone holds their breath waiting for the High Court and the Supreme Court. However, we expect that this is just the calm before the storm.

Stay tuned.

As we described in our newsletter of 4 March 2015, four Danish Eastern High Court cases (the so-called Primera cases) regarding compensation for delay have been appealed to the Danish Supreme Court. It is expected that these Supreme Court judgements will provide some guidance as to when a technical error under Danish law can be considered an extraordinary circumstance, exempting airlines from the obligation to pay compensation to delayed passengers.

Four cases have been stayed

As a consequence of this Supreme Court appeal, the District Court of Copenhagen gave an interlocutory order staying four cases until the Supreme Court has given their ruling. Thus, it seems that the District Court of Copenhagen is of the opinion that cases with at least some similarity to the Primera cases should await the Supreme Court in order to secure an equal of treatment. We agree.

The passengers' countermove has been to request for an appeal against this interlocutory order to stay the cases. We have just been informed that the request for an appeal has been approved, which means that the High Court shall decide on the question of whether cases regarding technical errors should be stayed while we wait for a judgement from the Supreme Court.

Our reaction

IUNO have asked the District Court of Copenhagen to stay a great number of our cases on delays and cancellations caused by technical errors – at least until the High Court has decided on the appeal case of the interlocutory order. Since it is expected that the Supreme Court ruling will provide an interpretation giving guidance on the categorization of technical errors as extraordinary circumstances, our opinion is that pending cases on technical errors should await this interpretation in order to secure equality before the law.

We have just seen the first two decisions from the District Court.

We are pleased to report that the District Court ruled in favour of the airline in both cases.

Thus, the District Court decided that both cases should be stayed; at least until the High Court has decided on the appeal case of the interlocutory order as mentioned above.

At this point, the legal area of passenger rights is to some extent in a standby position, as everyone holds their breath waiting for the High Court and the Supreme Court. However, we expect that this is just the calm before the storm.

Stay tuned.

Receive our newsletter

Aage

Krogh

Partner

Similar

logo
Aviation

26 May 2025

Claims for compensation and interest must be sent to the correct email address

logo
Aviation

22 April 2025

Regulation 261/2004 does not cover helicopter transport

logo
Aviation

18 February 2025

A passenger’s own rebooking did not grant compensation

logo
Aviation

22 January 2025

Internal documentation was sufficient

logo
Aviation

18 December 2024

Sweden to abolish aviation tax

logo
Aviation

11 December 2024

ICAO raises airline liability limits

The team

Aage

Krogh

Partner

Adam

Harding Ryyd Lange

Junior legal advisor

Albert

Berg Giese

Legal assistant

Amalie

Bjerre Hilmand

Senior legal advisor

Anna

Bonander

Legal advisor

Anna

Ferguson Bille-Biggart

Junior legal assistant

Anna

Kreutzmann

Legal manager (leave of absence)

Anna

Laura Brohl Larsen

Junior legal assistant

Anne

Voigt Kjær

Senior legal assistant

Anton

Winther Hansen

Senior legal advisor

Ashley

Kristine Morton

Legal advisor

Aurora

Maria Thunes Truyen

Associate

Bror

Johan Kristensen

Senior legal advisor

Caroline

Sofie Urup Malmstrøm

Legal assistant

Chris

Anders Nielsen

Senior legal advisor

Cille

Fahnø

Legal advisor

Clara

Caballero Stephensen

Junior legal advisor

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

Junior legal assistant

Feline

Honoré Jepsen

Legal assistant

Frederikke

Østerlund Haarder

Senior legal assistant

Freja

Pedersen

Junior 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

Junior legal assistant

Izabell

Celina Bastrup Lüthje

Senior legal assistant

Johanne

Alberte Liljeborg

Junior legal assistant

Johanne

Berner Nielsen

Senior legal assistant

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

Junior legal advisor

Mathias

Bech Linaa

Senior legal advisor

Mathias

Rex Brohus

Junior legal assistant

Mathilde

Bjørn Bjerring

Junior legal assistant

Mathilde

Stenderup

Junior legal assistant

Maya

Cecillia Jørgensen

Senior legal advisor

Merle

Frisendahl Fog

Junior legal assistant

Mie

Lundberg Larsen

Legal advisor

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

Legal assistant

Silje

Moen Knutsen

Legal advisor

Ulrikke

Sejersbøl Christiansen

Junior legal advisor

Victoria

Mai Gregaard Handberg

Legal advisor

Viktoria

Eline Hegelund

Senior legal assistant