Im a new user

I think that EU 261 is unclear in some situations. The law says:Let's say that you're flying A-B-C. A is in the EU while B and C are not.

1) The plane from A to B is delayed and you miss your connecting flight to C. According to ECJ rulings, care and compensation are calculated on your arrival time to C, not B. You measure the entire distance from A to C.2) You arrive on time to B, but a delay is incurred because something happens between B and C. I don't think that there have been any ECJ rulings covering this situation, but I think that there were some national courts which ruled that the passengers still were covered by EU 261.

This leads to some potential interpretations when going to the EU from outside the EU. This time, assume that you are flying A-B-C-D, where A & B are outside the EU while C & D are in the EU.

Assuming that you only consider the beginning and the end:

1) The airline which takes you from B to C is an EU airline. Since you used an EU airline, the entire trip is covered (case b) in the law), even if you're delayed between A & B. You measure the entire distance from A to D.

2) The airline which takes you from B to C is not an EU airline. This situation is not covered by the law, and so you get no protection at all, not even if the delay is incurred between C and D.

Assuming that you disregard non-qualifying legs:

1) If you use an EU airline from B to C, then you are protected if you arrive on time to B, but not if you are delayed before that. The distance is either measured from A to D or from B to D (a matter of debate).

2) If you use a non-EU airline from B to C, then you are protected if you arrive on time to C, but not if you are delayed before that. The distance is either measured from A to D or from C to D (a matter of debate).

Finally, we have the situation where you travel A-B-C where B is in the EU while A & C are not (e.g. North America to the Middle East), and you travel on an EU airline.

1) You only consider the start and the end. EU 261 covers situations where either the start point or the end point (or both) is in the EU. Since this isn't the case, EU 261 gives no protection.

2) Alternatively, you could consider the two flights as two separate journeys with separate compensation assessments independently of each other.

3) You could also decide that the entire journey is covered as a single journey.Actually, delays are also technically treated as "cancellations" in the law. There's no difference between a delay and a cancellation if you end up late to the destination.

highupinthesky

As far as I remember it's not the airlines, but the airports which count when calculating the compensation. e.g. Thai, Quatar, Emirats etc. who are none EU airlines, but flying to and from EU airports is covered by EU261, and if you are on a multi leg flight with them, the whole trip count when calculating the compensation.

When you are on a multi leg trip and one of the legs doesn't have any EU airports as departure or arrival, I'm in doubt whether you are entitled to compensation according to EU 261 if delays happens on this leg.

Im a new user

Non-EU airlines only have to compensate you when you're going from the EU, not when going to the EU. EU airlines have to compensate you in both directions.

highupinthesky

It's the first time I hear this, and it doesn't make sense at all.

CPH-Flyer

It does put the EU (plus Norway, Iceland, Switzerland) carriers at a disadvantage. However, seemingly the EU law can only have jurisdiction on non EU carrier departing the EU. So this os how it has to be.

RedChili

If it puts the EU carriers at a disadvantage or not, depends on how you look at it. It may also be an advantage since passengers that are familiar with this question will be more likely to book with an EU carrier, knowing that they'll in theory will be better protected by EU consumer laws.

CPH-Flyer

I doubt it has much influence on booking patterns I doubt a broad selection of passengers are even aware of this subtlety, and even less so thinks about it as a reason for selection.
​​​​​​

highupinthesky

I don't see any legal reason why the rules can apply to arriving flights too. If anything it would be easier to get documentation for late arrival at an EU airport than on a none EU airport. Beside that. If this is really true I wonder why Ryanair, Norwegian or other discount airlines, hasn't setup a base and companies outside EU a long time ago. It would make a lot of the EU261 claims redundant for them.

RedChili

For both those airlines, it's only a small minority of flights that are inbound to the EU (including EEA/Switzerland) anyway, so it wouldn't really matter. All flights within the EU and departing from the EU would anyway be covered. Norwegian has some flights departing from the USA, but the US also has similar laws, so there's no escape from those laws.

highupinthesky

All of Norwegian's long haul birds are registered in 2 separate legal company. Norwegian Air UK Limited, registered in UK and Norwegian Long Haul AS registered in Norway. There are only long haul birds in both companies. If they placed them in companies outside EU, they could reduce the EU261 claimed with 50% for those 2 companies. Given all the problems they have with their dreamliners, this could be a big savings for them.

CPH-Flyer

Setting up a base in e g. Morocco would not excuse them from the rules They would need to setup a new airline with a new AOC in Morocco. Most countries(ignore intra EU here) does not allow foreign control of airlines, so that would be very tricky. Even if they did manage to setup and own an airline with an AOC out side the EU, there is a good chance that ECJ would see that as an EU airline due to the ownership.

I don't know the details exactly of why it is the flights arriving in the EU that is excluded, but I guess jurisdictions belong to the country of departure. But that can be googled....

RedChili

In order to take advantage of the open skies agreement between the EU and the USA, an airline needs to be registered in either the EU or in the USA. And to be registered in the USA, a foreigner cannot own more than 25% of the controlling rights.

If they would register an airline in a non-EU state, such as Morocco or Serbia (two non-EU states that Norwegian flies to), they would definitely save tons of money, as they would have to cancel all their intercontinental flights.

Well, theoretically, they could apply for fifth freedom flights, operating e.g. BEG-LGW-JFK, BEG-ORY-LAX, etc. But that extra BEG-EU flight would cost A LOT more than the miniscule savings in EU compensation.

Bobbert

Most flights under Norwegian Air UK Limited fly out of Gatwick. Even if they transferred these flights to a company outside the EU, they would still be required to pay compensation as per EU261 since Gatwick is (for now) in the UK.

s115

Now SAS have sent us both money...to our bank who confirms it arrived with no routing information, name or any other details. So it was promptly sent back.
Well done SAS.

highupinthesky

If you read further up, you will see that none EU airlines only have to comply with EU261 for the flights leaving EU, not the flights arriving in EU.