Summer sees an increase in the number of flights, and with it the frustration of passengers with delayed or cancelled trips. One of the most common reasons is "unexpected plane crashes". But does this explanation really allow for the non-payment of compensation to passengers for damaged travel plans? Dainius Antanaitis, a lawyer at AVOCAD, points out that breakdowns are a normal part of air carriers' operations, so it does not mean that the company can escape liability.
According to Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, a passenger may be entitled to compensation ranging from €250 to €600, depending on the distance of the flight. However, airlines often rely on a clause that allows them not to pay compensation if the flight was not operated due to "extraordinary circumstances" that could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. "Just because a plane has broken down doesn't mean the airline doesn't have to compensate you. Breakdowns are a normal part of business, so not every one of them is an extraordinary circumstance," says Dainius Antanaitis.
According to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, a technical problem can only be considered an extraordinary circumstance if it is an unusual occurrence which the air carrier could not objectively foresee or control. If the failure is due to normal wear and tear, lack of maintenance or operation, this does not constitute grounds for refusing compensation. Even if the air carrier has complied with minimum maintenance standards, this does not mean that it has taken all necessary measures.
When is a failure considered an "extraordinary circumstance"?
Courts in both Lithuania and the EU take a realistic view of the circumstances and are critical of attempts to portray any malfunction as "exceptional". For example, in one case, a truly unexpected situation was found to be a case where the glass of an aircraft was shattered by an external impact. This is an unusual, unpredictable and objectively uncontrollable circumstance. In contrast, normal operational failures are the responsibility of air carriers.
"If the aircraft malfunction is one that is unavoidable sooner or later in the operation of the aircraft, it cannot be considered an extraordinary circumstance that eliminates the obligation to pay compensation," explains lawyer D. Antanaitis. Passengers faced with a flight delay or cancellation should not rely solely on what the airline says. They have the right to ask for an explanation, seek compensation and, in the event of a dispute, defend their rights in court.
"The most important thing is not to take the refusal to pay compensation for granted. Airlines often rely on formal explanations, but the courts look deeper into the situation," says AVOCAD's lawyer.
A breakdown is no excuse. And a passenger's right to compensation is not a favour, but a legal guarantee that should not be waived prematurely.