SAS and EC261/EU261 Claims [merged Discussions]
Sep 18, 2018, 10:53 pm
#16
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 71
There are several decisions of the CJEU which you are free to read and research.
Usually, this calculation cuts the passenger's way. By way of example, had your delay into KEF been 4+ hours, you would have been due EUR 600 for a Type 3 flight. You are due EUR 300 because your delay exceeded 3 hours on a Type 3 flight and that 50% of compensation is itself the result of CJEU precedent.
You are free to litigate to upset the precedent, but I suspect that most here are quite happy with the law as it is.
Usually, this calculation cuts the passenger's way. By way of example, had your delay into KEF been 4+ hours, you would have been due EUR 600 for a Type 3 flight. You are due EUR 300 because your delay exceeded 3 hours on a Type 3 flight and that 50% of compensation is itself the result of CJEU precedent.
You are free to litigate to upset the precedent, but I suspect that most here are quite happy with the law as it is.
Sep 19, 2018, 12:07 am
#17
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NYC
Programs: UA
Posts: 444
Thanks, but my point is that the definition of a type 2 vs 3 flight for a situation where it is one PNR with two flights, with the second only falling under eu261. You are accepting that it is a type 3 flight, which I dont. Unless its 'journey' or 'trip', vs 'flight' I don't see what the prior QR flight has to do with the situation. I guess i have to read cjeu verdicts.
As for meals I got a voucher for Eur 20 for dinner at FRA as a reference.
Sep 19, 2018, 10:02 am
#18
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Preferable @30.000 feet
Programs: More than one
Posts: 1,673
Thanks, but my point is that the definition of a type 2 vs 3 flight for a situation where it is one PNR with two flights, with the second only falling under eu261. You are accepting that it is a type 3 flight, which I dont. Unless its 'journey' or 'trip', vs 'flight' I don't see what the prior QR flight has to do with the situation. I guess i have to read cjeu verdicts.
Sep 19, 2018, 12:51 pm
#19
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 2,016
Qatar Airways isn't an EU airline so EU 261 wouldn't seem to cover that leg, so aren't you supposed to use the CPH-KEF distance instead of the DOH-KEF distance?
For a trip from outside the EEA to the EEA on non-EEA carrier, isn't the starting point the first EU layover airport?
For a trip from outside the EEA to the EEA on non-EEA carrier, isn't the starting point the first EU layover airport?
Sep 19, 2018, 2:21 pm
#20
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Preferable @30.000 feet
Programs: More than one
Posts: 1,673
Qatar Airways isn't an EU airline so EU 261 wouldn't seem to cover that leg, so aren't you supposed to use the CPH-KEF distance instead of the DOH-KEF distance?
For a trip from outside the EEA to the EEA on non-EEA carrier, isn't the starting point the first EU layover airport?
For a trip from outside the EEA to the EEA on non-EEA carrier, isn't the starting point the first EU layover airport?
This is not a theoretic example. It happened to me a couple of years ago, and no I didn't bother claiming compensation.
Sep 20, 2018, 3:07 am
#21
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 71
What with the situation where you fly from a to d on one PNR with flight changes at b and c. The leg b to c is just 1 hour and you have a 6 hour layover in c. By coincident the flight b to c gets canceled and you are rebooked on another flight which will bring you to c with a 5 hour delay, which means you will still be able to catch your last flight and arrive at your final destination on time. Do you think it would be fair to claim compensation for the delay on the b to c leg?
This is not a theoretic example. It happened to me a couple of years ago, and no I didn't bother claiming compensation.
This is not a theoretic example. It happened to me a couple of years ago, and no I didn't bother claiming compensation.
Sep 20, 2018, 3:23 am
#22
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 71
Funnily enough, doing some research, in fact this is not a delay situation - its a cancellation situation! Second last one.
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites...judgements.pdf
Flight that returns to the airport of departure The concept of "cancellation" also covers the case in which the aircraft took off but, for whatever reason, was subsequently forced to return to the airport of departure where the passengers of the said aircraft were transferred to other flights. Case C-83/10 (Sousa Rodríguez): CURIA - Documents 0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=12 2758
Article 5
(c) have the right to compensation by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 7, unless:
Therefore, 400 EUR is due and the original Qatar Airways flight is completely irrelevant to this situation.
(b) EUR 400 for all intra-Community flights of more than 1500 kilometres, and for all other flights between 1500 and 3500 kilometres;
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites...judgements.pdf
Flight that returns to the airport of departure The concept of "cancellation" also covers the case in which the aircraft took off but, for whatever reason, was subsequently forced to return to the airport of departure where the passengers of the said aircraft were transferred to other flights. Case C-83/10 (Sousa Rodríguez): CURIA - Documents 0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=12 2758
Article 5
(c) have the right to compensation by the operating air carrier in accordance with Article 7, unless:
Therefore, 400 EUR is due and the original Qatar Airways flight is completely irrelevant to this situation.
(b) EUR 400 for all intra-Community flights of more than 1500 kilometres, and for all other flights between 1500 and 3500 kilometres;
Sep 20, 2018, 4:20 am
#23
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: AGH
Posts: 5,979
As far as I understand it, it is only a cancellation if the flight which returned back to the gate was subsequently canceled. If the same flight (i.e. the flight number) in a new or repaired plane took place, it is not a cancellation. so, when they finally departed, what was the flight number? The same as before or a new one?
Sep 20, 2018, 4:59 am
#24
Join Date: Dec 2009
Programs: EB*D, M&M, IHG, Hilton Hhonors
Posts: 138
Funnily enough, doing some research, in fact this is not a delay situation - its a cancellation situation! Second last one.
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites...judgements.pdf
Flight that returns to the airport of departure The concept of "cancellation" also covers the case in which the aircraft took off but, for whatever reason, was subsequently forced to return to the airport of departure where the passengers of the said aircraft were transferred to other flights. Case C-83/10 (Sousa Rodríguez): CURIA - Documents 0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=12 2758
https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites...judgements.pdf
Flight that returns to the airport of departure The concept of "cancellation" also covers the case in which the aircraft took off but, for whatever reason, was subsequently forced to return to the airport of departure where the passengers of the said aircraft were transferred to other flights. Case C-83/10 (Sousa Rodríguez): CURIA - Documents 0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=12 2758
You are arguing with the wrong people here. We do not influence SAS' compensation decision. If you think that SAS is in the wrong, decline the compensation and get a lawyer involved.
Sep 20, 2018, 7:07 am
#25
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 71
If you read the full decision, it covers my exact situation. Yes, we turned back and were 'canceled'. We were reassigned a new plane, same flight number, but its irrelevant. That only stops us getting a full refund.
I'm not arguing with anyone, I thought you all may find this extremely interesting as it probably happens occasionally.
I'm not arguing with anyone, I thought you all may find this extremely interesting as it probably happens occasionally.
Sep 20, 2018, 8:52 am
#26
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Preferable @30.000 feet
Programs: More than one
Posts: 1,673
Please explain how your example is irrelevant to @Some persons post specifically. I agreed with what @Some persons is saying and can't find anywhere, least of all in this thread where someone has pointed to anything different, except some vague - go and read EUCJ rulings.
Sep 21, 2018, 2:56 am
#28
Join Date: Dec 2009
Programs: EB*D, M&M, IHG, Hilton Hhonors
Posts: 138
In that regard, the Court has held that it is possible, as a rule, to conclude that there is a cancellation where the delayed flight for which the booking was made is ‘rolled over’ onto another flight, that is to say, where the planning for the original flight is abandoned and the passengers from that flight join passengers on a flight which was also planned but independently of the flight for which the passengers so transferred had made their bookings (Sturgeon and Others, paragraph 36).
SAS didn't abandon the planning for the flight. It made a change to the plan (new timing, new plane). But even if you count that as an abandonment, the second criteria is not fulfilled. The replacement flight was not planned independently and you didn't join other passengers.
The change of plane can't be the deciding factor as airlines swap planes frequently.
Sep 21, 2018, 4:38 am
#29
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Preferable @30.000 feet
Programs: More than one
Posts: 1,673
IMHO my example is relevant, but we disagree on the interpretation of the rules, and I doubt that will change, so I'll drop out of this tread. Good luck with you claim.
Last edited by Ocn Vw 1K; Sep 21, 2018 at 3:41 pm Reason: See note above.
Sep 21, 2018, 4:38 am
#30
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 7
As for the vouchers, I agree with highupinthesky.
From what I remember when claiming with an agency before, they told me that I was not bound by the amount of the voucher I was given by the airline (Lufthansa in my case). According to EU 261, you are eligible for care regardless of the reasons behind the delay (-- I am mentioning that because the right to care is completely separate from the criteria for compensation).
So, if you have your receipts you can ask for a refund for whatever your expenses were. The airline that should pay is the airline that is operating the delay/missed connection/cancellation.
I am throwing it out there because a) it sounds wild but you can get (hopefully not milk) considerably more than a voucher and b) I hope that when people visit this thread they would learn something new and very useful
SOURCE: https://skyrefund.com/en/blog/right-...inks-and-hotel
From what I remember when claiming with an agency before, they told me that I was not bound by the amount of the voucher I was given by the airline (Lufthansa in my case). According to EU 261, you are eligible for care regardless of the reasons behind the delay (-- I am mentioning that because the right to care is completely separate from the criteria for compensation).
So, if you have your receipts you can ask for a refund for whatever your expenses were. The airline that should pay is the airline that is operating the delay/missed connection/cancellation.
I am throwing it out there because a) it sounds wild but you can get (hopefully not milk) considerably more than a voucher and b) I hope that when people visit this thread they would learn something new and very useful
SOURCE: https://skyrefund.com/en/blog/right-...inks-and-hotel