FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   The Suggestion Box (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/suggestion-box-756/)
-   -   EU261 forum? (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/suggestion-box/2143847-eu261-forum.html)

Kvarko Jan 26, 2024 2:29 pm


Originally Posted by DrMilano (Post 35942541)
Delta handles the EU261claims for AF/KLM when a US based passenger files a complaint.

I see. Well, I've just put in my EC261 claim directly with AF, and AF have acknowledged it. I suppose I can see that Americans might be more comfortable with interacting with Delta even if AF/KLM operated the flight.


Originally Posted by DrMilano (Post 35942541)
Issue with having a case log thread could be copyright infringement citing the law firm that summarized the Courts ruling.

This is becoming surreal. We can't have an EC261 forum because law firms might sue for case law quotes?! I think this is ludicrous FUD and I'm starting to wonder whether there's some vested interest being protected here.

[I'll just add that since I think this site is American, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use applies.]

Silver Fox Jan 27, 2024 1:41 am


Originally Posted by Kvarko (Post 35944872)
I see. Well, I've just put in my EC261 claim directly with AF, and AF have acknowledged it. I suppose I can see that Americans might be more comfortable with interacting with Delta even if AF/KLM operated the flight.



This is becoming surreal. We can't have an EC261 forum because law firms might sue for case law quotes?! I think this is ludicrous FUD and I'm starting to wonder whether there's some vested interest being protected here.

[I'll just add that since I think this site is American, [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use applies.]

It is. That's why case law and precedent exists. I used it successfully in my court case against United. The law firm doesn't own the case law whether it's in its favour or not, and the law firm is 100% immaterial. To suggest otherwise is absurd.

Kvarko Jan 27, 2024 2:31 am

I think DrMilano was suggesting that if one quoted from a law firm's case summary, said firm could sue for copyright violation. In practice I am confident a quote would be well within the "fair use" provisions, and if someone was still worried they could instead just give a cross-reference (e.g. URL) to the law firm's case summary.

This is all doubly moot because the case law will mostly come from the ECJ, which gives very nice summaries, e.g. https://curia.europa.eu/juris/docume...t=1&cid=282678 (scroll to the end) -- and a more detailed analysis is at https://www.lexology.com/library/det...7-1dd049f3b068 , of which the key part is:


Originally Posted by Stenger Rechtsanwälte - Dr. Wiebke Seyffert
In conclusion, the ECJ clarified that passengers forfeit their right to compensation under Regulation (EC) 261/2004 if they fail to show up for check-in on time, even if they are aware of a significant flight delay. Additionally, passengers who proactively book alternative flights in anticipation of delays may not be eligible for compensation if the alternative flight results in an arrival delay of less than three hours.

I am confident no-one is going to get sued for this quote!

Kvarko Jan 30, 2024 2:33 pm

I'm still not clear TravelBuzz is the best forum for generic EC261 questions, but anyway, I've posted the following there: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trav...l#post35955812 .

Silver Fox Jan 31, 2024 1:18 am


Originally Posted by Kvarko (Post 35955817)
I'm still not clear TravelBuzz is the best forum for generic EC261 questions, but anyway, I've posted the following there: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trav...l#post35955812 .

Thread link doesn't work and I couldn't see the thread in travelbuzz. Did it get merged into something else or removed? Or am I missing it?

NewbieRunner Jan 31, 2024 3:02 am


Originally Posted by Kvarko (Post 35955817)
I'm still not clear TravelBuzz is the best forum for generic EC261 questions, but anyway, I've posted the following there: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trav...l#post35955812 .


Originally Posted by Silver Fox (Post 35957017)
Thread link doesn't work and I couldn't see the thread in travelbuzz. Did it get merged into something else or removed? Or am I missing it?

Try this link?
https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/trav...g-carrier.html
.

Kvarko Jan 31, 2024 3:11 am

No, it got moved to an AA-specific forum (my mistake for giving AA and BA as examples; I should have kept it completely generic): https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/amer...n-carrier.html .

Kvarko Feb 8, 2024 1:34 am

Just one example of why a dedicated generic EC261 forum would be helpful: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35975936-post317.html .

jerry_greece Aug 22, 2024 3:21 pm


Originally Posted by Kvarko (Post 35859448)
Is compensation due under EU261 (or UK261) in this case? The obvious cancellation compensation is not, as it was >= 14 days in advance (see EU261/5(1)(c)(i)). However I've had at least one of those claims companies tell me that yes, it is due owing to the delay w.r.t. the original arrival time. Maybe there's some case law I've missed, though I could not find it on https://flightdelaypay.com/leading-cases/

Don't want to hijack another thread, but i remember a post/thread in the forum that had an ongoing list of court cases related to EU261 or maybe not? Does somebody recollect it/can find it?

csycsycsy Dec 30, 2024 5:59 am

I guess a sticky thread https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/europe-477/ listing the important cases that build upon the original eu261 law would be useful.

The EU commission has a non chronological ver. updated 2022
https://transport.ec.europa.eu/docum...judgements.pdf

Some firm's version chronological 2020
https://www.dlapiper.com/-/media/fil...6B172271189488


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:40 am.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.