Originally Posted by
orbitmic
It isn't. It's fairly clear
I couldn't disagree more! For example, it couldn't be less clear about what compensation is due when a flight is delayed (rather than cancelled) because it does not mention it at all!
and most grey areas have now been clarified by the ecj.
I agree with that, but it's appalling that the ECJ has been required to spell out some very basic principles that should have been spelled out in the legislation.
And it's still not clear what is or isn't an exceptional circumstance, but I accept that we have a lot more clarity on that than before (from the courts) and that we can't have an exhaustive list.
Don't fall for the airlines argument which claim lack of clarity only because they know only too well what it means but keep hoping for dubious loopholes.
Oh I'm not falling for their argument; I just have a bee in my bonnet about how sloppy the legislation is. Anyway I completely agree with your advice to OP to claim based on technical fault here.