Originally Posted by
irishguy28
The reference to Community carriers in EC 261/2004 is in the context of flights arriving at an airport in a Member State from a third country - that clearly is not the case here.
Yes, good spot! That means the claim should certainly be under the UK version, it's just a case of who against.
This part of the scope is also relevant, I think, although I've reached the paracetamol stage some time ago.
5. This Regulation shall apply to any operating air carrier providing transport to passengers covered by paragraphs 1 and 2. Where an operating air carrier which has no contract with the passenger performs obligations under this Regulation, it shall be regarded as doing so on behalf of the person having a contract with that passenger.
So wetleases are certainly covered. I think this means the claim needs to be against BA, but we're definitely into IANAL territory here.