Posts

EuGH Judikatur 2024

ECJ case law in 2024 on extraordinary circumstances

/in /by

In 2024, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) once again addressed the interpretation of extraordinary circumstances under Article 5(3) of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation. The focus was on two key questions: whether certain design defects and a staff shortage during baggage handling could be classified as extraordinary circumstances.

Design Defects

As established in the landmark Wallentin-Hermann case (C-549/07), hidden manufacturing defects may constitute extraordinary circumstances. In 2024, the ECJ provided further clarity in two significant cases involving design defects:

  • Case C-385/23: A design defect in the fuel gauge of a newly introduced aircraft model.
  • Case C-411/23: A design defect in the engine, reported to the airline months prior to the incident.

In both instances, the ECJ ruled that the design defects in question qualified as extraordinary circumstances. The Court reasoned that such defects, discovered post-entry into service, constitute hidden manufacturing defects that jeopardize flight safety. Since airlines have no control over such defects—discovered by manufacturers only after delivery—they fall outside the normal scope of an air carrier’s operations.

Of particular note, in Case C-411/23, the ECJ emphasized that the timing of the airline’s awareness of the defect was irrelevant. What mattered was that the defect existed at the time of the cancellation and was beyond the airline’s control.

Staff Shortage for Baggage Handling

The Touristic Aviation Services case (C-405/23) examined whether a staff shortage at an airport operator responsible for baggage handling could be classified as an extraordinary circumstance.

Here, the ECJ built upon principles established in the SATA International case (C-308/21), which dealt with the failure of an airport operator’s refueling system. The Court reaffirmed that events falling under the responsibility of third parties, such as airport operators, cannot be deemed controllable by airlines if the airline has no influence over them.

The ECJ also provided guidance on reasonable measures, stating that airlines must proactively seek alternatives, such as engaging the services of another provider, to minimize disruption and ensure continued operations.

Don’t hesitate to contact our Aviation Team to learn more about the ECJ case law in 2024 on extraordinary circumstances and in general about passsenger claims in Austria.

Kostenlose Tarife, öffentliche Verfügbarkeit und zeitlicher Zusammenhang bei Alternativbeförderung

Reduced Fares, Public Availability, and Temporal Connection for Alternative Transportation

/in /by

The first decision by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) of 2025 (C-516/23) provides significant clarifications regarding the interpretation of the Passenger Rights Regulation. The preliminary ruling addressed questions concerning the application of the regulation, particularly with respect to reduced fares or those not directly or indirectly available to the public, as well as the temporal connection between a canceled flight and alternative transportation.

The ECJ clarified that passengers do not travel “free of charge” under Article 3 (3), first sentence, first variant, of Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004 if they were required to pay air transport taxes and charges when booking their flight. Taxes and charges are integral components of the ticket and are not excluded from it. A passenger is only considered to travel free of charge if the ticket is obtained without any form of compensation.

With respect to the second variant of Article 3 (3), first sentence, of Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004, the ECJ ruled that a ticket is not considered “not directly or indirectly available to the public” if the ticket was booked as part of a promotional campaign. Such campaigns offering reduced fares, even if limited in time or quantity and directed at a specific professional group, are deemed publicly available.

Conversely, a fare is not considered available to the public if the target group for which it is intended is sufficiently well-defined. A group of healthcare professionals described only abstractly, without detailed reference to specific distinguishing characteristics, and for whom ticket issuance does not require prior individual approval, falls under the definition of a ticket available to the public.

Finally, the ECJ addressed the temporal connection between a canceled flight and alternative transportation under Article 8(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004. According to the ECJ, no temporal connection between the canceled flight and the requested alternative flight is required. Alternative transportation to the final destination may, subject to seat availability and comparable travel conditions, also be requested at a later time.

Don’t hesitate to contact our Aviation Team to learn more about passsenger claims in Austria.