Compensation from ET

Back to Forum

This topic contains 28 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by  SimonS1 15 Aug 2019
at 18:35
.

Viewing 14 posts - 16 through 29 (of 29 total)

  • SimonS1
    Participant

    Whilst i know what happens if an individual gets a CCJ, but what are the effects of a CCJ on a company (more specifically and airline)? Surely it must have an effect on the granting of licenses as it questions the financial integrity of the business?

    I think it depends on the context. For a big company, the occasional CCJ is perhaps an occupational hazard, and in any case you can pay it within a month of the hearing to avoid record. I doubt for example BA’s license would be at risk for the sake of a few CCJs.

    If on the other hand a small company had multiple CCJs then it would indeed be a warning bell, just like it would be against an original.


    Otte
    Participant

    What’s important here are not the legal questions re certain laws etc,but the tendency of ET to ignore complaints,or if they do reply,it’s irrelevant to the topic.

    With Some airlines you just have to accept that complaining won’t get you anywhere ,unless you are willing to spend much time and effort to twist their hand to at least reply .

    With the enormous growth of ET in the past couple of years,I doubt they increased their customer care staff to deal with the much higher volume of feedbacks .

    When I was ill treated by LH I expected sincere addressing of my complaints,and when they didn’t deliver,it ended in court in my favor.
    With ET I won’t bother unless it’s an extreme abuse.Unfortunately I must be realistic regarding whom I’m dealing with.


    capetonianm
    Participant

    This document makes it pretty clear :

    Court of Justice of the European Union
    PRESS RELEASE No 95/19
    Luxembourg, 11 July 2019
    Judgment in Case C-502/18
    CS and Others v České aerolinie a.s
    Connecting flights that are the subject of a single reservation departing from a Member State to a non-Member State via another non-Member State: the air carrier that performed the first flight is obliged to pay compensation to passengers who suffered a long delay in the arrival of the second flight performed by a non-Community air carrier
    Eleven passengers made with the Czech air carrier České aerolinie a single reservation for flights connecting Prague (Czech Republic) to Bangkok (Thailand) via Abu Dhabi (United Arab Emirates). The first of those connecting flights, operated by České aerolinie and connecting Prague and Abu Dhabi, was performed according to the flight plan and the plane arrived on time at Abu Dhabi. However, the second flight, performed, under a code-share agreement, by the non-Community air carrier Etihad Airways and connecting Abu Dhabi and Bangkok, arrived 488 minutes (8 hours and 8 minutes) late. That delay of more than three hours means that those passengers may be entitled to compensation under the regulation on the rights of air passengers.1
    The passengers brought, before the Czech courts, proceedings against České aerolinie seeking the compensation provided for by the regulation on the rights of air passengers. However, České aerolinie contends before those courts that those proceedings are unfounded, claiming that it cannot be held responsible for the lateness of the flight connecting Abu Dhabi and Bangkok given that that flight was performed by another air carrier. Hearing the case on appeal, the Městský soud v Praze (Prague City Court, Czech Republic) asks the Court of Justice whether České aerolinie is obliged to pay compensation under the regulation on the rights of air passengers.
    By today’s judgment, the Court states, first, that a flight with one or more connections which is the subject of a single reservation constitutes a whole for the purposes of the right of passengers to compensation provided for in the regulation on the rights of air passengers.2 Accordingly, connecting flights of which the first flight was performed from an airport located in the territory of a Member State, in this case Prague, fall within the scope of that regulation even if the second of those connecting flights was performed by a non-Community carrier from and to a country which is not an EU Member State.
    As regards whether České aerolinie, the air carrier that performed the first of the connecting flights, can be liable to pay the compensation due because of the long delay in the arrival of the second of those connecting flights, performed by Etihad Airways, the Court holds that, under the regulation on the rights of air passengers, the obligation to pay compensation to passengers falls solely on the operating air carrier of the flight concerned. In that regard, the Court states that, if an air carrier is to be categorised as the operating air carrier, it must, inter alia, be demonstrated that that carrier actually performed the flight in question. Since České aerolinie actually performed a flight under the contract of carriage entered into with the passengers concerned, it can be categorised as the operating air carrier.
    1 Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1)).
    2 Case: C-537/17 Wegener, see also Press Release No. 77/18.
    http://www.curia.europa.eu
    Consequently, the Court concludes that, in the circumstances of the present case, České aerolinie is, in principle, liable to to pay the compensation provided for in the regulation because of the long delay in the arrival of the connecting flight for Bangkok even though that long delay occurred in the flight connecting Abu Dhabi and Bangkok and is attributable to Etihad Airways. To that effect, the Court states in particular that, in the case of flights with one or more connections that are the subject of a single reservation, an operating air carrier that has performed the first flight cannot take refuge behind a claim that the performance of a subsequent flight operated by another air carrier was imperfect.

    Last, the Court states that the regulation on the rights of air passengers reserves to the operating air carrier that has had to make payment of compensation to passengers, because of a long delay of connecting flights giving rise to a single reservation and, in part, performed by another carrier under a code-share agreement, the right to bring an action against the latter in order to obtain redress for that financial cost.
    NOTE: A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and tribunals of the Member States, in disputes which have been brought before them, to refer questions to the Court of Justice about the interpretation of European Union law or the validity of a European Union act. The Court of Justice does not decide the dispute itself. It is for the national court or tribunal to dispose of the case in accordance with the Court’s decision, which is similarly binding on other national courts or tribunals before which a similar issue is raised.
    Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the Court of Justice.
    The full text of the judgment is published on the CURIA website on the day of delivery.
    Press contact: Jacques René Zammit  (+352) 4303 3355
    Pictures of the delivery of the judgment are available from “Europe by Satellite”  (+32) 2 2964106

    3 users thanked author for this post.

    AFlyingDutchman
    Participant

    Apologies for my ignorance in Law, but what is a CCJ?


    SimonS1
    Participant

    Apologies for my ignorance in Law, but what is a CCJ?

    A county court judgement (in the UK).

    1 user thanked author for this post.

    MarkCymru
    Participant

    There’s no need to use a solicitor who’ll take a cut. Start with filling out a form letter on resolver.co.uk. They have contacts for all airlines. They’ll send it and chase for a response. They can then escalate it for you (see below). It worked very well in a recent claim from Aeroflot.

    Most airlines are then memebers of alternate dispute resoltion schemes. These will take the complaint if you’ve tried claiming but had no luck. See https://www.caa.co.uk/Passengers/Resolving-travel-problems/How-the-CAA-can-help/Alternative-dispute-resolution/

    Ethiopian isn’t in an ADR which means you then have two choices. You can ask the CAA to mediate. This will take 10 weeks. The decision isn’t legally binding but it’s a brave airline that ignores it.

    You can also go straight to small claims court. It’s really easy. Just fill out the form online and pick a court near you. The airline has to come to you. The hearing is informal and lawyers aren’t allowed. The judge will hand down a decision there and then. After I won a case against Air India, they paid within two weeks.

    The hitch is that, since your flight orginated in Italy, you ought to make the claim in Italy. Resolver will still handle it but they can’t escalate it. Act fast: if Downing Street succeeds in severing us from our neighbours in the EU, things will get much more complicated. But for now, there’s a European small claims procedure which you can use. The EU small claims procedure is outlined here https://www.gov.uk/recover-debt-from-elsewhere-in-european-union. The excellent Money Saving Expert guide here tells you more. https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/travel/flight-delays/

    BTW, I’m a big fan of Ethiopian and I’d pick them any day over many “first world airlines”. Have you been on United recently? You may have noticed that “the first world” isn’t what it was and Africa isn’t either. They’re moving in different directions, though


    SimonS1
    Participant

    There’s no need to use a solicitor who’ll take a cut. Start with filling out a form letter on resolver.co.uk. They have contacts for all airlines. They’ll send it and chase for a response. They can then escalate it for you (see below). It worked very well in a recent claim from Aeroflot.

    Most airlines are then memebers of alternate dispute resoltion schemes. These will take the complaint if you’ve tried claiming but had no luck. See https://www.caa.co.uk/Passengers/Resolving-travel-problems/How-the-CAA-can-help/Alternative-dispute-resolution/

    Ethiopian isn’t in an ADR which means you then have two choices. You can ask the CAA to mediate. This will take 10 weeks. The decision isn’t legally binding but it’s a brave airline that ignores it.

    You can also go straight to small claims court. It’s really easy. Just fill out the form online and pick a court near you. The airline has to come to you. The hearing is informal and lawyers aren’t allowed. The judge will hand down a decision there and then. After I won a case against Air India, they paid within two weeks.

    The hitch is that, since your flight orginated in Italy, you ought to make the claim in Italy. Resolver will still handle it but they can’t escalate it. Act fast: if Downing Street succeeds in severing us from our neighbours in the EU, things will get much more complicated. But for now, there’s a European small claims procedure which you can use. The EU small claims procedure is outlined here https://www.gov.uk/recover-debt-from-elsewhere-in-european-union. The excellent Money Saving Expert guide here tells you more. https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/travel/flight-delays/

    BTW, I’m a big fan of Ethiopian and I’d pick them any day over many “first world airlines”. Have you been on United recently? You may have noticed that “the first world” isn’t what it was and Africa isn’t either. They’re moving in different directions, though

    Just to clarify – there is no point asking CAA to mediate as they don’t handle cases originating in another EU country.


    PeterCoultas
    Participant

    Assuming SimonS1’s earlier comment is correct:

    “As stated in Article 3, EC261 applies to
    1. All carriers/flights departing from an EU airport
    2. Any flights arriving at an EU airport that are operated by a EU airline.”

    This was also my understanding but I’m very interested where this goes if the UK leaves the EU….

    Any views?


    capetonianm
    Participant

    I read somewhere that UK will be considered as EU for this purpose, the as CH and NO, for example.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    In the short term it won’t go anywhere, as under the EU Withdrawal Act 2018 the existing protections under EC261 have been carried into UK law. That is the Day 1 position.

    Further down the line of course the UK Government may choose to strengthen, weaken, modify or remove the protections. Who knows, but I doubt it will be a Day 1 priority for the Government post Brexit.


    MarkCymru
    Participant

    The protections will (for now) continue in UK law, as I understand it. Access to the European small claims procedure would, I think, depend on a transition period and would then depend on an agreement between the UK and the EU. If we crash out, I think it will disappear on the 31st of October. This trip originated outside the UK, with a non-UK carrier, so would not probably be the basis for a successful claim in a British court


    agsteele
    Participant

    I’ve many years successful travel with Ethiopian and few reasons to require a claim.

    However, last November our flight was denied a slot at Frankfurt and, as a result, we missed the absolute 23h00 curfew on flights. So the crew and passengers were disembarked with a promise of EU compensation.

    I enquired at Addis Ababa as instructed but was told I would be best asking at my final destination as an additional flight had been arranged to carry the 150 passengers connecting to Kilimanjaro. Of course my suitcase didn’t make the rearranged flight. So I asked at Arusha and was immediately offered USD100 for the lack of clothes etc. Their advice for the EU compensation was to ask when I got home. This I did and received the full, long haul maximum delay compensation in my bank account within 2 weeks.

    My lost suitcase was eventually found and returned only for a wheel to be broken onm the return journey. ET coughed up €25 for that too in cash.

    So my experience has been positive in therms of getting the compensation due.


    agsteele
    Participant

    Actually a non-EU carrier with a flight starting in the EU is obliged to pay EU compensation for the flight which starts in the EU. So a delayed connecting flight isn’t covered.


    SimonS1
    Participant

    Actually a non-EU carrier with a flight starting in the EU is obliged to pay EU compensation for the flight which starts in the EU. So a delayed connecting flight isn’t covered.

    This is completely incorrect.

    It was originally found in Air France v Folkerts that only the time at final destination of the connecting flight/s counted.

    The CAA took a similar view, and Emirates then appealed it all the way through the Appeal Court to the Supreme Court in London, losing at every stage.

    In fact only last week the ECJ extended this even further in CS v České Aerolinie and ruled that the first carrier is liable for the full amount even where the passenger is connecting to a different airline.

    3 users thanked author for this post.
Viewing 14 posts - 16 through 29 (of 29 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
BT November cover
BT November cover
Be up-to-date
Magazine Subscription
To see our latest subscription offers for Business Traveller editions worldwide, click on the Subscribe & Save link below
Polls