Originally Posted by
Often1
What causes you to say that? While generalizations on both sides of the issue are never accurate, many would tell you that once you accept that Switzerland is not an EU Member State and thus, while it has adopted EC 261/2004, it is not bound by CJEU precedent, that LX pays our under the Regulation as it exists under Swiss law exactly as it is required to.
I'm the first to admit I'm not an expert. However, based on years of browsing forums like this, it seems to be fairly widely agreed that extracting EU261 compensation from Swiss is far more difficult, and less likely to be successful, than for other European airlines.
Originally Posted by
Often1
The fact that Switzerland has not subjugated itself to the CJEU is not relevant to whether the OP's parents were on time at JFK.
That depends on what exactly you mean by "relevant".
If you mean "EU261 and Switzerland/EU politics is not relevant to an elderly couple being charged $1600 for showing up a little late", then I agree with you. That law, and those politcal arguments, have nothing to do with that happened to the OP's parents.
If, however, you mean "The fact that Swiss refuses to compensate its passengers for its own tardiness is not relevant to its demand to be compensated when its passengers are tardy", then I disagree with you. Why should I pay a fee to Swiss if I'm late, but they are not obligated to do the same for me if they're late?
From a moral standpoint, one is very relevant to the other, even if from a legal standpoint they are not.