THE BOTTOM LINE
- Operational Choices Are Not “Extraordinary”: Cancelling a flight to prevent a subsequent flight from violating an airport curfew is considered an internal operational decision, not an “extraordinary circumstance” under EU law.
- Compensation Liability Stands: Airlines remain liable for compensation under EU Regulation 261/2004, even when a cancellation is made to optimize fleet or crew scheduling for future flights.
- Risk Remains with the Carrier: The financial and operational risks associated with tight flight schedules and potential “domino effect” delays lie with the airline, not the passenger.
THE DETAILS
In a recent ruling, the District Court of North Holland provided a crucial clarification on the limits of the “extraordinary circumstances” defense used by airlines to avoid paying compensation for cancelled flights. The case involved a passenger on an EasyJet flight from Amsterdam to Geneva that was cancelled. The passenger sought the standard €250 compensation stipulated by EU Regulation 261/2004, which protects passenger rights in cases of flight disruption.
The airline’s defense centered on a “knock-on” effect. It argued that a prior flight was delayed, which in turn would have delayed the passenger’s flight. This initial delay meant that the return flight from Geneva back to Amsterdam was at risk of violating the strict night-time curfew at Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport. To avoid this future violation and the associated operational chaos, the airline made the decision to pre-emptively cancel the outbound Amsterdam-Geneva flight altogether. It contended that this chain of events constituted an extraordinary circumstance beyond its control.
The court unequivocally rejected this argument. The judge noted that the night curfew did not apply to the passenger’s actual flight (Amsterdam to Geneva), but to a different, subsequent flight. The airline could have operated the passenger’s flight, even with a delay. The decision to cancel it was based on internal, operational considerations—namely, managing its aircraft and crew schedules to avoid a future problem. The court classified this as a business choice, not an unavoidable external event. Such operational decisions are inherent to the normal business activity of an airline and do not absolve it of its legal obligation to compensate affected passengers.
SOURCE
Source: Rechtbank Noord-Holland
