Originally Posted by
Globaliser
Section 75(1) says:-The reason that I'm inclining to agree with the answer "no" is because it seems arguable that a claim against the supplier under 261/2004 is neither a claim in respect of a misrepresentation, nor a claim in respect of a breach of contract, but is a claim for statutory compensation.
The circumstances in which the 261/2004 claim arises may amount to a breach of contract by the supplier (failing to supply the transport contracted for), and the 261/2004 liability may be a consequence of the same circumstances as gave rise to the breach of contract, but that doesn't itself make the 261/2004 claim "in respect of" a breach of contract.
Indeed, but I wasn't talking about the 261 question in my post - I was responding to Jambon87's more general assertion, which is *not* how s.75 works. It implied for example that the credit card company would not be liable for the cost of a replacement flight, whereas my experience, and my understanding, is that they are.
The 261 question is not something I've looked into.