EU261 forum?
Jan 26, 2024 | 2:29 pm
#16
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: LON
Programs: oneworld (Sapphire), Lidl Plus
Posts: 117
[I'll just add that since I think this site is American, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use applies.]
Last edited by Kvarko; Jan 26, 2024 at 2:30 pm Reason: Fix markup for URL
Jan 27, 2024 | 1:41 am
#17
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Democratic People's Republic of the UK
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 21,917
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.]
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.]
Jan 27, 2024 | 2:31 am
#18
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: LON
Programs: oneworld (Sapphire), Lidl Plus
Posts: 117
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:
I am confident no-one is going to get sued for this quote!
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 Rechtsanwlte - 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.
Jan 30, 2024 | 2:33 pm
#19
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: LON
Programs: oneworld (Sapphire), Lidl Plus
Posts: 117
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 .
Jan 31, 2024 | 1:18 am
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Democratic People's Republic of the UK
Programs: Lifetime Gold, Global Entry, Hertz PC, and my wallet
Posts: 21,917
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 .
Jan 31, 2024 | 3:02 am
#21
Senior Moderator, Moderator: Community Buzz and Ambassador: Miles & More (Lufthansa, Austrian, Swiss, and other partners)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 150km from MAN
Programs: LH SEN** HH Diamond
Posts: 30,428
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 .
Ticketing carrier?
.
Jan 31, 2024 | 3:11 am
#22
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: LON
Programs: oneworld (Sapphire), Lidl Plus
Posts: 117
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 .
Feb 8, 2024 | 1:34 am
#23
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2023
Location: LON
Programs: oneworld (Sapphire), Lidl Plus
Posts: 117
Just one example of why a dedicated generic EC261 forum would be helpful: https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/35975936-post317.html .
Aug 22, 2024 | 3:21 pm
#24
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: 39000ft
Posts: 1,341
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/
Dec 30, 2024 | 5:59 am
#25
Join Date: Jul 2022
Location: Madrid
Programs: IB Platino / OWE. Mucci (de Barajas)
Posts: 3,262
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
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