Originally Posted by
corporate-wage-slave
Not quite, see Article 1, clause 3:
3. Application of this Regulation to Gibraltar airport shall be suspended until the arrangements in the Joint Declaration made by the Foreign Ministers of the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom on 2 December 1987 enter into operation. The Governments of Spain and the United Kingdom will inform the Council of such date of entry into operation.
You are drawing a flawed conclusion from that paragraph.
What it says is that Gibraltar airport is out of scope. It does not say that all flights which come into contact with it are not covered.
This is why the RAM example I cited is not covered.
But BA and easyjet flights certainly are.
I'm aware of cases where BA have paid up, also cases where easyJet have not.
I'm personally aware of probably well over 100 specific cases where BA have paid out. And I'm NOT aware of any cases where they have not.
I'm probably aware of 40+ cases where easyJet have paid out. While there have been some easyjet initial attempts to argue it doesn't apply they have to my knowledge NEVER held to that point when challenged on it (I will say I know of some cases where people didn't bother challenging them on it, but I know of no instances where when challenged easyJet did not ultimately back down).
(Also loads of Monarch cases too).
Anyone who has been rebuffed just needs to challenge them on it. Easyjet have generally given me lots of silly 261 arguments, where as BA uses robot replies to field first line enquires, I think U2 use people without much knowledge who look it up for themselves, you only get the proper people who know what they are talking about when pushed.