Air Passengers Rights Regulation
The Court of Justice of the European Union has interpreted passenger rights strictly, so that there are virtually no exceptions for airlines to evade their obligations for breach of contract.[10] The requirements for an entitlement to compensation and the specific amount owed depend on the length of a flight, whereas the relevant distance is determined according to the great circle method.[21] Said cash payments merely serve to compensate a traveller's inconvenience and do not replace or form a part of any potential reimbursements for unused tickets, trips in vain, additional transport costs, meals and accommodation.Airlines are obliged to display a notice at their check-in counters stating: Additionally, when an airline cancels a flight, denies a person boarding, or incurs a delay exceeding two hours to a flight, it is obliged to provide each passenger affected with a written notice setting out their rights under the regulation, and the contact details of the national body tasked with enforcing the regulation.This case therefore closed the loophole which had allowed the airlines to abuse passengers by frivolous interpretation of "technical or extraordinary circumstances"; it further defined the phrase and limited its exploitation.In its judgment, the Fourth Chamber of the Court of Justice held: Extraordinary circumstances” was not defined in the 2004 Regulation, but the phrase was to be interpreted narrowly since article 5(3) constituted a derogation from the principle, indicated in recitals 1 and 2 of the preamble, of protection of consumers, in as much as cancellation of flights caused serious inconvenience to passengers.However, what actually lies within the concept of defining what is inside or outside of the "actual control of the air carrier" is not clear and is subject to litigation in many EU-states.Furthermore, in the joined cases of Sturgeon v Condor, and Bock v Air France (C-402/07 and C-432/07),[26] the Fourth Chamber of the European Court of Justice held on 19 November 2009 that despite no express provision in the Regulation to compensate passengers for delay, passengers are now entitled to the compensation as set out in Article 7 for any delay in excess of three hours providing the air carrier cannot raise a defence of "extraordinary circumstances".[29] In the case of Denise McDonagh v Ryanair Ltd (C-12/11), the Third Chamber of the European Court of Justice ruled that natural disasters such as the eruption of the Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull and the subsequent cloud of volcanic ash in 2010, which shut down most European air traffic, do constitute "extraordinary circumstances" that release air carriers from the obligation to pay compensation, but that there is no such category as "super-extraordinary circumstances" that would release them from the obligation to provide care.[30] In the case of Jet2 vs. Huzar, the English Court of Appeal ruled on 11 June 2014 that "ordinary technical problems that cause flight disruption, such as component failure and general wear and tear, should not be considered “extraordinary circumstances”".[33] In September 2015, the Court of Justice of the European Union judged, regarding Case C-257/14:[34] affecting the safety of flights or acts of sabotage or terrorism may exempt air carriers from their obligation to pay compensation.In Joined Cases C-156/22 to C-158/22 against TAP Portugal, the ECJ ruled that the death of a pilot due to operate a flight was not deemed to be extraordinary circumstances, as the absence of a member of staff "constitutes an event inherent in the normal exercise of that carrier’s activity".For example, in response to the added pressure caused by the increase in EU 261 claims in recent years, in 2011 Ryanair put in place a €2.00 surcharge per ticket to compensate for its additional costs.