European Court of Justice, judgement of 25.01.2024 – C 474/22
Background
The passenger had booked a flight with the airline Laudamotion from Düsseldorf to Palma de Mallorca on 26 June 2018. Due to the announced delay of the flight, the passenger feared that he would miss a business appointment and therefore travelled on another flight. His original flight arrived in Palma de Mallorca with a delay of three hours and 32 minutes.
The passenger assigned his claims against the airline to the company flightright, which claimed compensation of € 250 from Laudamotion. After the claim was dismissed at first instance, the case was successful on appeal. The airline lodged an appeal with the Federal Court of Justice, which referred the case to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.
The Federal Court of Justice asked the European Court of Justice whether a claim for compensation due to a delayed arrival time of the flight requires the passenger to actually arrive for check-in 45 minutes before the published departure time. In the event of a flight cancellation, the passenger is exempt from the obligation to arrive in time for compensation, so it is questionable whether the case of a significant flight delay can be equated with this.
Reasons
The European Court of Justice rejected the equalisation of the two cases regarding the corresponding interpretation of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation. The European Union regulation on air passenger rights applies to passengers travelling to an airport within the territory of a member state, who already have a confirmed booking for their flight and who arrive in good time for check-in. These two conditions must be met cumulatively; an exception only applies if the booked flight has been cancelled, as it is then already clear that the flight will not be operated.
In principle, the case of a cancelled flight is similar to that of a delayed flight, as in both cases the passenger suffers greater inconvenience and damage due to the irreversible loss of time. The compensation payment is therefore inextricably linked to the existence of a loss of time of three hours or more.
However, if the passenger did not go to check-in, for example because he did not go to the airport in the first place or because he booked an alternative flight, this damage caused by the loss of time did not occur, as the passenger could have used the lost time in another way. The purpose of the compensation payment is to provide financial compensation for inconveniences caused by the lost time, such as the fact that the usual means of communication are temporarily unavailable or the passenger is unable to attend to their professional or personal matters.
In the event of a long flight delay, however – unlike a cancellation – it is not certain that the flight will not take place at all, so that the passenger is not released from his obligation to arrive in time for check-in.
Evaluation
The judgement of the European Court of Justice is one of many rulings on the rights of passengers in the event of delayed and cancelled flights. You can also read a judgement by the Federal Court of Justice on the granting of compensation in the event of a rescheduled flight or on compensation payments in the event of a stop-over.
If it is already clear in advance that the booked flight will be delayed, compensation will only be paid in accordance with the Air Passenger Rights Regulation if the passenger has actually arrived at the airport for check-in. The purpose of the compensation payment is precisely to compensate passengers for the inconvenience caused by the loss of time. However, if the passenger uses another punctual flight instead, no time is lost.
The question of whether the passenger is entitled to compensation within the meaning of Art. 12 of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation must be considered separately. If the passenger misses a business meeting due to a delayed or cancelled flight, for example, this damage would not be compensated via the compensation payment anyway, but would have to be claimed as individual damage.
The Federal Court of Justice is now required to rule on the proceedings pending there in accordance with the interpretation of the European Court of Justice.
Matthias Gollor
Lawyer for travel law
Read more about the specialisations of our law firm at www.rnsp.de.