Originally Posted by
Tyzap
Article 7 compensation cannot be reduced by 50%. Only compensation under article 8 can.
Originally Posted by
Tyzap
The right to compensation is not pursuant to Article 8, it's pursuant to article 7.
In this case you are governed by Article 5, which does not go as far as 7.2 c, that only applies under article 8.
It seems to me that Article 5 does not limit the parts which it invokes of either Articles 7 or 8.
If your flight is cancelled, you must always be offered Article 8 assistance. (Article 8 does not provide for compensation, but you knew that.)
In addition, you may qualify for Article 7 compensation if you do not fall within one of the exceptions set out in Articles 5(1)(c)(i) to (iii).
That combination means that when a passenger whose flight has been cancelled qualifies for Article 7 compensation, they may also have been cared for under Article 8 by re-booking / re-routing. Therefore Article 7(2) can be triggered by whatever has been done for the passenger under Article 8.
In addition, Article 8 is not a standalone provision. You only get to Article 8 by being referred to it through either Article 4, Article 5 or Article 6. Applying your logic, Article 7(2) would never be applicable, because you could always say "In this case you are governed by Article 4", "In this case you are governed by Article 5" or "In this case you are governed by Article 6". That simply doesn't make sense.