Here is the version of the ec261:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.ht...C_1&format=PDF

-please read article 3 (scope)
-also if you can please find the article which exclude non community carriers

in addition I shall also send out a mail to the relevant authorities

(so, that means, anyone who departs from an EU airport, regardless of carrier)


(that means, passengers departing from any airport, arriving in an airport of an EU state where the treaty applies, unless there was prior assistance given, but the operating carrier must be a community carrier).

Community carrier is defined in Article 2:
Emirates' operating licence is granted by the United Arab Emirates. The UAE is not a Member State of the European Union, and the licence was obviously not granted in accordance with the Council Regulation stipulated.

Therefore, Emirates is only bound in respect of flights that satisfy condition (a) in Article 3, which is when their flights depart the territory of a Member State where the Treaty applies.

Very first paragraph says community carrier. Look at definition of community carrier on left side of page.

I have sent a mail to the concerned authorities,

Meanwhile I found this on their website:

http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens...r/index_en.htm

I think that makes it quite clear that the regulation does not apply to non-EU carriers flying to the EU:

Why? You're clearly wrong on this, so why bother sending an email? This is probably the clearest section of the whole EU261 regulation :)

The is is to clarify if the connecting flights ex-eu are covered?

had a claim against one of the me3 when flying out of the eu , they refused the claim in response said ec261 does not apply to them,
sent them a copy of the regulations, they are still in denial.
I dont have the time , instead i stopped flying with them.

not clearly wrong partially wrong , does not apply when flying into the eu,
but does apply when flying out from eu

yes but they argue only to connection point, whether that is correct or not is still in dispute.

Not in the UK.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/ar...ay-lia-442163/

They argue as they don't wanna pay,
that should be clarified by the response of the ec261 authorities,
already got the acknowledgement of the mail I sent to them.

Weren't there rumours of EK wanting to appeal to a higher court (possibly EU-level). Also, UK != EU ?? (Brexit)

I think they lost the appeal as headline mentions, which means the initial judgement was in the favor of the pax.

also here is another detailed link to the same case

http://www.hfw.com/EU261-English-Cou...s-October-2017


and the initial case:
https://gettingthedealthrough.com/ar...2612004-appeal

The reasoning in that case is that the sanction of EC261 applies in respect of the first flight only (that is, MAN-DXB, to resolve the extra-territorial element), but that the level of compensation is to be determined with respect to time of arrival in the final destination on the journey - the ECJ already ruled that flights are independent in Emirates v Schenkel: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conte...:EU:C:2008:400

That is to say, EC261 would not apply on the return journey back to the EU at any stage, as none of the flights are in the scope of the regulation, but when the journey has a flight in the scope of the regulation (such as an ex-EU departure), then the final arrival at the end of that journey is what matters, no matter if that ultimate destination is outside the EU.