Regulation 261/2004 and Montreal Convention?
Is a flight delayed or canceled or does a passenger face a denied boarding? Then Regulation 261/2004 and the Montreal Convention (Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air) govern the rights of passengers vis-à-vis tour operators and airlines. Passengers can claim compensation (lump sum) and care or assistance (e.g. accommodation, meals and refund of ticket price or a replacement flight). Furthermore, the Regulation and the Convention sometimes also offer the possibility of compensation for other individual damages.
They may file these claims with the airline or a tour operator. In short, airlines and tour operators regularly face claims, which are not always (fully) assignable. After all, there are numerous factors at play in aviation that airlines can face that disrupt flight operations.
The attorneys at LVH Lawyers have long handled these passenger claims for airlines. We take over the entire handling from the subpoena. This allows the airline to focus on its core business. To give you an idea of what our lawyers have to deal with, a number of topics are discussed below. These come into play in passenger claims arising from Regulation 261/2004 and the Montreal Convention.
Extraordinary circumstances?
At LVH Lawyers, we have now seen all types of extraordinary circumstances pass by. Therefore, we can advise and litigate on the existence of extraordinary circumstances. Strikes, bad weather, power outages, acute medical situations or problems with passengers. Nothing is too crazy. We test the existence of extraordinary circumstances on the basis of the case law of the Court of Justice, as well as lower case law.
It is becoming increasingly clear when an extraordinary circumstance exists. It is therefore easier to assess whether an extraordinary circumstance exists. Nevertheless, there is still some regular discussion about this. Think of the effect of bad weather, the impact of changing an EOBT or a change of aircraft.
What is more difficult, on the other hand, is whether all reasonable measures were taken to mitigate the delay. This varies widely in case law. What about using substitute aircraft, when is there a reasonable alternative? When should a flight be offered from a third airline? Our aviation specialists will be happy to answer these questions and more for you.
Schedule change?
Another topic that comes up with some regularity is schedule amendments. LVH Advocaten is of the opinion that a schedule change is not automatically covered by the Regulation. Therefore, passengers are not always entitled to compensation. A schedule change can in some situations be equated with a cancellation or delay. However, this is not necessarily so.
Additional benefits beyond compensation?
The compensation that follows from Article 7 of Regulation 261/2004 is a lump sum. Discussion of the amount is therefore not an issue. In contrast, this does come into play with the compensation for care costs and the compensation that passengers can claim under the Montreal Convention. Passengers cannot claim all costs. After all, the costs must have been reasonable and necessary. For example, a passenger cannot book a hotel at Transavia’s expense after reaching the final destination because the passenger finds it too late in the evening to go home. It is notable that claim agencies often file all costs, but judges, when sufficiently reasoned defenses are presented, do not award all costs.
Consider, for example, the cost of a replacement ticket. Each airline charges different prices for its tickets. Has a passenger purchased a relatively cheap ticket from an airline? Then the airline cannot be required to bear the cost of a ticket in a completely different price range. After all, the Regulation speaks of a replacement flight with comparable transportation conditions.
Claim bureaus
Several claims agencies operate within the world of passenger claims. These agencies bring many claims to the competent court. LVH Advocaten is familiar with these agencies and can advise you on how to deal with these claims. The agencies all have different working methods, so it is important to be aware of this.
It also remains important to adequately contest the claims. Otherwise, the frameworks of Regulation 261/2004 and the Montreal Convention will be stretched too far. It is good that passengers’ interests are protected, but within the confines of the law.
Conclusion
In short, it is a dynamic area of law when knowledge within aviation is very important. LVH Advocaten has this knowledge. The lawyers do not shy away from METAR messages, IATA delay codes, closing messages and other documents from Eurocontrol. Our lawyers use these documents to tell a clear story in court about the rejection of the claim towards the passengers. Besides knowledge of aviation, LVH Advocaten in Rotterdam is a full service office for entrepreneurs. We have all specialties in-house. This allows us to properly handle all facets of a procedure.
Want to learn more about what our aviation specialists can do for your airline? Feel free to contact Lisa Kloot of LVH Advocaten in Rotterdam for more information about passenger claims handling.
