Old Dec 4, 18, 3:17 pm
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 48,419
In a nutshell, LX was entirely correct in denying OP's claim, presuming that what it says in its response is true.

This was a flight on a non-EU carrier between two points outside the EU, e.g., SIN and ZRH. Thus, EC 261/2004 only applies to the extent provided in Swiss law. Switzerland enacted the Regulation as Swiss law but has not adopted some of the more "artful" interpretations of the CJEU which exercises no supervisory or precedential authority over Swiss law.

As written, many "tech" issues would quite easily qualify as "extraordinary circumstances" under the Regulation. However, as the result of interpretation, it is now pretty much a given that any tech issue, let alone a knock-on cancellation from a tech issue, is not "extraordinary".
As described by LX, this issue sounds as though it is exactly the sort which was never intended to be covered by the Regulation but which the CJEU determined are covered.
Often1 is offline