Semi-OT. I don't know the source of this story, but now I've seen it twice and it might have some bearing.
After 4 unavailing years, Austrian courts had it with Thomas Cook owned airline Condor and was about to impound their plane at Salzburg airport when the airline finally paid the 600€.
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/trav...m_content=link
Also, Primera Air lost an EU261 case in Danish supreme court this week, where the Danes established the same principles as other EU member states' courts have done. This might open the floodgates in Denmark, as 4500 cases are on hold in Danish lower courts right now.
Despite court after court has laid down the rulings on EU261, that this is exactly how far EU261 goes, airlines are still in denial. In Denmark airlines claims this must now be addressed by EU and are putting pressure on politicians. They say that this ruling "will force us to fly unsafe planes, because we rather do that than pay"
http://www.thelocal.dk/20160404/dani...yed-passengers
I think these two reports goes to prove just how much is at stake. Airlines just won't accept EU261 since the use of delays is an integral part of their business model when handling unplanned tech issues.
This certainly is true for Finnair too. It is build around the "clever" operations model where only one aircraft is needed for each destination with a daily service. Leaving very little room to accommodate any tech issue and the only capacity sitting idle is the bird waiting at HKG to become AY70. Delaying AY69 is from operations point of view extremely smart and efficient. It has been 'free of charge' to do so for many years.
Consumer rights are usually very well protected and upheld in nordic countries but as far as EU261 goes they have failed. It is up to individuals to push cases through and to get some high profile results (ceasing tangible assets like an Airbus or two under heavy media coverage) before we will see a change, it seems.