BA16 SYD-LHR 2 Dec, delayed overnight

Old Dec 2, 2018, 8:23 am
  #16  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
The cancelled flight operates on an EU carrier between two countries outside the EU. What remains to be seen and is yet undecided is whether either UK or EU courts (ultimately) determine that the same principle which would apply in the other direction, e.g. LHR-SIN-SYD, would apply for SYD-SIN-LHR where the delay into LHR exeeds 3 or 4 hours as the case may be.
Often1 is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 8:28 am
  #17  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,721
Indeed, it seems rather like the 'flipside' of the Gahan decision. Arguable either way but I wouldn't be at all surprised if a court found an EU carrier liable in this situation.

https://www.twobirds.com/en/news/art...ble-for-delays
Ldnn1 is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 8:34 am
  #18  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 38,642
Originally Posted by Dave Noble
and this evening, those who decided it would be good to book BA16 -> BA12 will be kicking themselves at the lack of EUR600
I suspect that those who decided that it would be good to book BA16 --> BA12 had their reasons for doing so, and that those reasons all remained good reasons for having made that decision at the time that it was made - even though one of the potential downside risks of booking that routing happened to materialise on the day.

That's hardly a reason for kicking oneself; more an occasion to sing along with Doris Day.
PrimaVista likes this.
Globaliser is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 10:51 am
  #19  
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Battleaxe Alliance
Posts: 22,126
Originally Posted by simons1


Not necessarily. Those airlines that can operate in a timely way with reliable fleets will have no costs to pass on.
There are costs associated with doing that (e.g. spare aircraft, spares, storage thereof, extra staff etc. for faster response to any defects) though, which will be passed on.
LTN Phobia is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 11:06 am
  #20  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Originally Posted by LTN Phobia
There are costs associated with doing that (e.g. spare aircraft, spares, storage thereof, extra staff etc. for faster response to any defects) though, which will be passed on.
Not necessarily. I didn't mention extra aircraft, just that an airline operating a younger more fuel efficient fleet might have higher reliability and lower costs than one operating a fleet including old aircraft.
simons1 is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 11:22 am
  #21  
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: Battleaxe Alliance
Posts: 22,126
Originally Posted by simons1


Not necessarily. I didn't mention extra aircraft, just that an airline operating a younger more fuel efficient fleet might have higher reliability and lower costs than one operating a fleet including old aircraft.
Newer does not necessarily mean better reliability though. Issues like the 787 can and do happen, and can have both direct and indirect effects (e.g. aircraft shortage which reduces spare capacity for substitution, or issues associated with higher utilisation, deployment on certain routes that may have an impact on other aspects of operations), and even availability of spares can be an issue.

Aircraft and associated costing is pretty complex and interesting.
PUCCI GALORE likes this.
LTN Phobia is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 2:00 pm
  #22  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: DCA
Programs: UA US CO AA DL FL
Posts: 50,262
The problem is that the original language of EC 261/2004 has been perverted by the courts which have read into the Regulation language which a perfectly competent EC was capable of writing itself had it wanted to.

The Regulation as adopted and enforced by Switzerland, not a Member State, gives a more accurate view of how it ought to operate and creates and maintains the incentives for carriers to operate in a timely, efficient, and safe manner.
Often1 is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 4:18 pm
  #23  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,427
Originally Posted by PAL62V


Why would they not get compensation, out of interest? I understand it’s not to an eu destination but it’s still an eu operator?
Because SYD-SIN is a flight from Outside the EU to another point outside the EU and so is not covered

If booked on the direct flight SYD-LHR it is a flight on an EU carrer from outside the EU to the EU and so is covered

Originally Posted by DFB_london


most people just want get where they wanted to go at the time scheduled to do so.
Indeed they do - but since the flight is cancelled, those on that flight are not going to be travelling on rhat flight ; some will be eligible to claim benefits under EC261, others will not; those that deliberately chose to change flights in Singapore may well be kicking themselves that since the flight is cancelled, that they have missed out


Originally Posted by Ldnn1
That is a very confident 'under any circumstances' claim. Has there been any case law on whether it applies to a community carrier flight from a third country to a third country when connecting on the same ticket to a member state?
Given how clear the text is to what flights are applicable, I would be surprised if anyone has tried taking to court the situation where a flight that is completely operated outside of the region where the law apples - I would be even more surprised if someone had won such a case

Last edited by Dave Noble; Dec 2, 2018 at 4:24 pm
Dave Noble is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 4:27 pm
  #24  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: London
Programs: Qantas Platinum, United Premier 1K, HSBC Premier, AVIS President's Club, Marriott Bonvoy Platinum
Posts: 100
Originally Posted by flatlander
That's not the issue, see regulation text above. It's that the flight is not to or from an EU/EEA airport.

The herring you thought you saw was not red.
Wooosh
warreng is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 4:33 pm
  #25  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Programs: Mucci de l'Arbitrage
Posts: 927
Originally Posted by Often1
The Regulation as adopted and enforced by Switzerland, not a Member State, gives a more accurate view of how it ought to operate and creates and maintains the incentives for carriers to operate in a timely, efficient, and safe manner.
You have never attempted to get compensation from LX!
rossmacd likes this.
Takiteasy is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 4:48 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,721
Originally Posted by Dave Noble
Given how clear the text is to what flights are applicable, I would be surprised if anyone has tried taking to court the situation where a flight that is completely operated outside of the region where the law apples - I would be even more surprised if someone had won such a case
Firstly, it's really not that clear. Secondly, the courts haven't exactly shied away from tortuous interpretations of the regulation to find in favour of the consumer on points like these.

Personally if I were in this situation I wouldn't have much hesitation about taking the argument to court. That's of course assuming there isn't case law on the point already, which I haven't checked.
Ldnn1 is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 5:04 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Programs: BA Gold
Posts: 454
And back to the original topic it is very rare for that flight to be cancelled and is of interest (it's my most frequent LH flight)... would be interested to hear how BA either re-routed or otherwise looked after people as they don't have a lot of (any) spare aircraft in that part of the world and so if they weren't pushing them onto other carriers then they're going to have trouble getting them out the next day...
flyingmonkie is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 8:08 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: East Cheam
Programs: QF, BA, VA
Posts: 198
An unusual sight at SYD - two BA 777's.


Last edited by TonyHancock; Dec 2, 2018 at 8:19 pm
TonyHancock is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 11:01 pm
  #29  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LON
Programs: QF Plat & LTG, VA Plat
Posts: 1,434
Originally Posted by flyingmonkie
And back to the original topic it is very rare for that flight to be cancelled and is of interest (it's my most frequent LH flight)... would be interested to hear how BA either re-routed or otherwise looked after people as they don't have a lot of (any) spare aircraft in that part of the world and so if they weren't pushing them onto other carriers then they're going to have trouble getting them out the next day...
I'm mildly curious too - loads of OW options SYD-LHR that go out after the BA flight (QF, CX, QR, MH) plus the usual Middle East & Asian carriers. The original BA aircraft still needs to come back though, so I suspect it would be cheaper to put everyone in a hotel for the night. You'd hope F/J/Golds got looked after if they needed to travel that day.
justin_krusty is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2018, 11:15 pm
  #30  
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Originally Posted by Ldnn1
Firstly, it's really not that clear. Secondly, the courts haven't exactly shied away from tortuous interpretations of the regulation to find in favour of the consumer on points like these.

Personally if I were in this situation I wouldn't have much hesitation about taking the argument to court. That's of course assuming there isn't case law on the point already, which I haven't checked.
It would be an interesting case. BA would inevitably (perhaps not unreasonably) take the narrow argument that SIN-SYD is outside the scope of EC261.

The passenger might however argue that they had paid for a trip from LHR-SYD on one ticket which was delayed by failure of BA equipment and who knows the courts might back the consumer.

With 600 at stake it might be worth a punt, or at least a call to Bott & Co.
simons1 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.