FSUnole03

onward flight - ATL-EYW.

cayohueso already posted about the mx on ATL-EYW: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta...echanical.html

TTT

Unfortunately not since the delay did not happen within/departing from the EU nor did it happen on an EU airline.

cayohueso

It was a single ticket from FRA to EYW all with AF flight numbers although DL was the codeshare carrier from ATL.

Grouchy

AF codeshare numbers are not relevant. Look at the scope of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004:

1. This Regulation shall apply:

(a) to passengers departing from an airport located in the territory of a Member State to which the Treaty applies;
(b) to passengers departing from an airport located in a third country to an airport situated in the territory of a Member State to which the Treaty applies, unless they received benefits or compensation and were given assistance in that third country, if the operating air carrier of the flight concerned is a Community carrier.

Definitions

For the purposes of this Regulation:

(c) "Community carrier" means an air carrier with a valid operating licence granted by a Member State in accordance with the provisions of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2407/92 of 23 July 1992 on licensing of air carriers(5);

TTT

For this regulation, operating carrier is what matters. Marketing carrier isn't relevant.

slowly

Since you were departing the EU and reached your final destination more than 3 hours later than originally scheduled, you are entitled to the 600 EUR compensation. File a claim with the operating airline of the last segment.

Stgermainparis

Are you sure? I was LHR-ATL on Aug 8. That flight (VS booked via DL) was not delayed, but my connecting flight (DL) after that was (b/c of computer glitch) for 27 hours. I was told by many on FT that since the EU flight itself was not delayed, I was not entitled to EU261.

flyerCO

Incorrect. The flight from EU was not delayed. The flight to EYW is on DL a non-EU airline, thus no compensation is due.

slowly

Is it your personal interpretation? I would argue that the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union is slightly more relevant:

Passengers on connecting flights must be compensated when their flight arrives at the final destination at least three hours late
The fact that the original flight was not delayed beyond the limits laid down by EU law does not affect the right to compensation

Case C-11/11
Air France SA v Heinz-Gerke Folkerts and Luz-Tereza Folkerts

Renes Points

I would ask for AIRHELP's help on this one as they have won a ton of case with connections as of late. The airlines have said connections do not matter but the courts have said they do. Worth a try either way.

slowly

The delay of individual segments is not important. The deciding factor is the time you arrive at your final destination, as decided in the judgement above.

(Although I'm not 100% sure which airline you should fill the claim with.)

flyerCO

However for a claim there would need to be a qualifying event on the ex-EU flight. The arrival time of the connecting flight only matters in regards to an issue on the covered flight.

Example 1 - Flight to ATL is cancelled. Passenger is reroute on another carrier to ATL in time to make ATL-EYW. ATL-EYW is delayed getting in. The arrival time of EYW flight matters be a use this is the time by which compensation is based for the cancelled EU flight. Even though they made it into ATL and the EYW isn't on a EU carrier the claim is based on the EU-ATL flight, and regardless of the EU-ATL flight having no bearing on arrival into EYW compensation is due.

Example 2 - Flight from EU to ATL operates as scheduled. No cancellation. The EYW is delayed multiple hours. In this case (which is what the OP has) there's no flight that is covered by EU261 that had any issue what so ever. Thus the arrival time into EYW is irrelevant. No compensation under EU261 is due.

slowly

flyerCO, are you a ECJ judge? If not, I fail to see how your personal interpretations of the Regulation 261/2004 are relevant.

Case C-11/11 I mentioned before is the only ECJ judgement I know of that deals with connecting flights. If you know any others please quote them. Since the Regulation 261/2004 doesn't explicitly define how to apply it to connecting flights, case C-11/11 is all we have, anything else would be just our opinions which are of zero help and interest to the parties involved.

TTT

What does a ECJ decision have to do with a US airline operating wholly in the US? If one were to pursue this, how would they go about doing so? Taking Delta to a US court isn't going to work as the US has no regulation regarding cancelled flights and has no ability to enforce an EU law.

Additional information from www.airhelp.com (the aforementioned service that can assist in claims processing):

https://www.airhelp.com/en/know-your-rights

The asterisk basically answers the question presented. Since the OP traveled on two airlines, the Delta flight delay doesn't apply as it is neither departing from, nor arriving in a EU airport.

Interestingly, the OP may have been eligible if they had flown a DL flight from Paris.

flyerCO

UM, people come here asking for information. No one comes here expecting a ECJ judge to answer there question. You're quite simply misreading the judgment in the case you are referring to. In fact it gave clear examples. Sorry that you don't like the answer, but the fact is that EU261 doesn't apply to a flight operated on a non EU carrier not departing from the EU. Arrival time of the final flight only matters in regards to a claim for EU261 for a flight covered by EU261. In this case the covered flight had no issue that would be covered by EU261, thus the arrival time of the connecting flight is irrelevant. If the first flight had an issue covered by EU261 then the arrival time of the connecting flight matters, but only in regards to what amount of compensation that gets paid for the covered flight. The ruling didn't extend EU261 to cover flights departing outside the US. It just said that the arrival time of the connecting flight is what matters for calculation purposes.

Before this the airline's would say that if the delay to the final destination was the result of the non-covered flight that compensation didn't need to be paid.

Again Example 1 - The flight from EU was cancelled, and person tossed on another airline. Flight gets into ATL with time to catch original flight. Plane then has mechanical issue and is delayed. Under the old standard the airline didn't need to pay out. They would say the delay was the result of an issue on the non-covered flight

Example 2 - same as above but under new standard as issued by ECJ. The arrival time of the final flight (regardless of reason for delay) is used to calculate compensation under EU261.

Notice in the new standard the compensation is still based on the ex-EU flight. They no longer get out of paying a claim by saying the late arrival was the result of the non-covered flight. At no point did the judgement extend EU261 to cover the ATL-EYW flight.