admin – Express Law Solutions

By Natalie Popova, Legal Consultant | Express Law Solutions

Air passenger disputes continue to generate a substantial volume of litigation and regulatory complaints in England and Wales, particularly during periods of seasonal congestion such as the winter and Christmas travel peak. Delays, cancellations and denied boarding are frequently treated by airlines as operational issues, yet from a legal perspective they engage a detailed statutory framework imposing strict obligations and, in many cases, strict liability.

Passenger rights in this area are primarily governed by Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, retained in domestic law as UK261, and supplemented by the Consumer Rights Act 2015, principles of contract law, and, in relation to baggage, the Montreal Convention 1999 as incorporated by the Carriage by Air Acts. Together, these instruments establish a coherent regime regulating airline liability, compensation and standards of conduct.

UK261 applies to all flights departing from the United Kingdom irrespective of the nationality of the carrier, and to flights arriving in the UK where the operating air carrier holds a UK operating licence. The Regulation confers rights to compensation and assistance in cases of long delay, cancellation and denied boarding. Its application is assessed by reference to arrival at the final destination, not intermediate segments or internal airline scheduling.

Under Article 7 UK261, passengers are entitled to fixed statutory compensation where arrival at the final destination occurs three hours or more after the scheduled arrival time, or where a flight is cancelled or boarding is denied against the passenger’s will. Compensation is assessed by reference to flight distance rather than ticket price or actual loss and is payable on a strict liability basis unless the carrier can establish the statutory defence of extraordinary circumstances.

Flight delays are the most frequently litigated category of claims. The assessment of delay focuses on the moment at which at least one aircraft door is opened and passengers are permitted to disembark. This approach, confirmed in Sturgeon v Condor Flugdienst, is now settled law. Delays arising earlier in the journey are legally irrelevant unless they affect final arrival time.

Airlines frequently seek to rely on extraordinary circumstances to defeat delay claims, particularly during winter operations. However, this defence is narrowly construed. In Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia, the Court of Justice confined extraordinary circumstances to events external to the carrier’s normal activity and beyond its actual control. That principle was reaffirmed domestically in Huzar v Jet2.com Ltd, where the Court of Appeal held that routine technical defects, component failures and maintenance-related issues are inherent operational risks and cannot engage the defence.

Seasonal conditions do not lower this threshold. While genuinely exceptional meteorological events may qualify as extraordinary circumstances, predictable winter weather, de-icing delays, congestion and crew displacement are ordinarily treated as operational risks that airlines are expected to manage. Courts and ADR bodies consistently require airlines to demonstrate a direct causal connection between the alleged extraordinary event and the specific delay, together with evidence that all reasonable mitigating measures were taken.

In addition to compensation, Article 9 UK261 imposes a mandatory and independent duty of care. Once delay thresholds are exceeded, airlines must provide meals, refreshments, accommodation where necessary, and transport. This obligation applies regardless of whether compensation is ultimately payable. Failures to comply frequently give rise to reimbursement claims and may also engage section 49 of the Consumer Rights Act 2015, where transport services are not performed with reasonable care and skill.

Flight cancellations and denied boarding engage parallel rights under UK261, including entitlement to refund or re-routing and, in many cases, compensation. Overbooking is treated as a commercial decision rather than an extraordinary circumstance, and compensation is routinely payable where boarding is denied without the passenger’s consent.

Claims relating to delayed, lost or damaged baggage fall outside the scope of UK261 and are governed by the Montreal Convention. This regime imposes strict but capped liability based on proven loss and is subject to strict notification deadlines, which remain a common procedural pitfall.

From a procedural perspective, enforcement remains the primary challenge. Airlines frequently issue standardised refusals at first instance, often citing extraordinary circumstances without sufficient evidential support. Escalation through approved Alternative Dispute Resolution schemes regularly exposes deficiencies in these defences, resulting in determinations in favour of passengers. Where ADR does not resolve the dispute, proceedings issued in the County Court under the Small Claims Track frequently settle shortly after service.

English courts continue to apply the six-year limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980 to UK261 claims, as confirmed by the Court of Appeal in Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd. Airlines’ attempts to impose shorter contractual or Convention-based limitation periods have been consistently rejected.

The legal position is therefore well established. Passenger rights are clearly defined by statute and supported by consistent judicial authority. Seasonal disruption does not dilute airline liability; rather, it tests compliance with a framework designed to operate precisely in such conditions. The principal difficulty faced by passengers lies not in the existence of rights, but in their effective enforcement against systematic resistance by carriers.

This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. Do passenger rights still apply in the UK after Brexit?

Yes. Passenger rights continue to apply under UK law. Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 has been retained in domestic legislation as UK261, ensuring that compensation and assistance rules remain largely unchanged following Brexit.

2. What law applies if my flight involves both the UK and the EU?

This depends on the route and the airline:

UK261 applies to flights departing from the UK, regardless of the airline.
EU261 applies to flights departing from the EU.
For flights arriving in the UK, UK261 applies only if the airline is a UK carrier.

In some cases, either regime may apply, but compensation cannot be claimed twice.

3. How long must a flight be delayed before compensation is payable?

Compensation may be payable where the passenger arrives at the final destination three hours or more later than scheduled, unless the delay was caused by extraordinary circumstances beyond the airline’s control.

4. Are technical problems considered “extraordinary circumstances”?

Generally, no. English courts have consistently held that routine technical defects and mechanical issues form part of an airline’s normal operations and do not exempt carriers from liability (see Huzar v Jet2).

5. What compensation amounts are available under UK261?

Compensation is fixed by law:

£220 for short-haul flights
£350 for medium-haul flights
£520 for long-haul flights

The amount depends on the distance of the flight, not the ticket price.

6. Can compensation be refused if the airline offers vouchers or rebooking?

Yes. Airlines cannot lawfully replace statutory compensation with vouchers unless the passenger freely agrees to accept them. Passengers retain the right to cash compensation under UK261.

7. What are my rights if my flight is cancelled?

You are entitled to:

a full refund or re-routing to your destination, and
compensation, unless the airline can prove extraordinary circumstances or that sufficient notice was given under UK261.

8. Do airlines owe assistance even if compensation is not payable?

Yes. Under Article 9 UK261, airlines have a duty of care, including food, refreshments, accommodation, and transport, regardless of whether compensation is ultimately due.

9. How are claims for lost or damaged baggage handled?

Baggage claims are governed by the Montreal Convention 1999, not UK261. Compensation is based on proven loss and is subject to a financial cap. Strict time limits apply for notifying the airline.

10. How long do I have to bring a compensation claim in England and Wales?

Claims under UK261 are subject to a six-year limitation period, in accordance with the Limitation Act 1980, as confirmed by the Court of Appeal.

11. What can I do if the airline refuses to pay compensation?

Passengers may:

escalate the complaint through an approved ADR body,
refer the matter to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), or
issue proceedings in the County Court (Small Claims Track).

12. Does weather always count as an extraordinary circumstance?

Not always. Only severe and unavoidable weather conditions may qualify. Airlines must provide evidence that the weather directly caused the disruption and that reasonable measures could not have avoided it.

13. Can multiple passengers claim compensation for the same flight?

Yes. Each passenger has an individual right to compensation, regardless of whether tickets were purchased together.

14. Does compensation apply to connecting flights?

Yes. Where flights form part of a single booking, delay is assessed based on arrival at the final destination, not individual segments.

15. Is compensation taxable in the UK?

Generally, statutory compensation for flight disruption is not considered taxable income, as it is compensatory in nature. Individual tax advice should be sought where necessary.

Examples from Practice: Procedural Outcomes (ADR and Court Proceedings)

Example 1: Technical Delay — ADR Resolution

Following an initial rejection by the airline on the grounds of a “technical issue”, the passenger escalated the matter to an approved Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) body.

Relying on established case law (Huzar v Jet2), the ADR found in favour of the passenger and ordered payment of £220 compensation, which the airline complied with within 28 days.

Example 2: Last-Minute Cancellation — Small Claims Court

An airline refused compensation for a short-notice cancellation, citing internal operational difficulties. The passenger issued proceedings via the County Court (Small Claims Track).

The court held that the airline had failed to discharge its burden of proof under UK261. Judgment was entered for £520 compensation, plus the court fee and statutory interest.

Example 3: Overbooking — Settlement Before Hearing

A denied boarding claim was commenced through the small claims process after the airline insisted on vouchers instead of cash. Following service of the claim, the airline settled in full prior to the hearing, paying statutory compensation and costs.

This reflects a common practice where airlines seek to avoid adverse judicial findings.

Example 4: Duty of Care Breach — Reimbursement Ordered

A passenger incurred hotel and meal expenses during an overnight delay. The airline disputed its obligation, arguing no compensation was due.

An ADR adjudicator confirmed that Article 9 UK261 duty of care applies independently of compensation. The passenger was awarded full reimbursement of documented expenses.

Example 5: Weather Defence Rejected — Court Determination

An airline attempted to rely on adverse weather conditions to refuse compensation. However, meteorological evidence showed weather disruption at the destination had minimal impact on the flight.

The court rejected the extraordinary circumstances defence and awarded compensation in full.

Example 6: Limitation Period Dispute — Claim Allowed

An airline argued that the claim was time-barred after two years. Proceedings were issued in the County Court.

Relying on Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd, the court confirmed that a six-year limitation period applies in England and Wales, allowing the claim to proceed.

Example 7: Baggage Loss — Montreal Convention Settlement

A baggage claim initially dismissed by the airline was escalated to ADR. The airline accepted liability under the Montreal Convention and settled the matter within the SDR limits.

Example 8: Limitation Period Confirmed

An airline rejected a compensation claim arguing that it was “out of time” after two years.

In England and Wales, the six-year limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980, confirmed in Dawson v Thomson Airways, applied, and the claim remained valid.

Sources and Legal Authorities

¹ Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights.

² European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018.

³ The Air Passenger Rights and Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019.

⁴ Consumer Rights Act 2015, ss 49 and 62.

⁵ Limitation Act 1980, s 5.

⁶ Carriage by Air Act 1961; Carriage by Air Act 1962; Carriage by Air Act 1964.

⁷ Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (Montreal Convention 1999).

⁸ Sturgeon v Condor Flugdienst GmbH (Joined Cases C-402/07 and C-432/07) [2009] ECR I-10923.

⁹ Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia – Linee Aeree Italiane SpA (Case C-549/07) [2009] ECR I-11061.

¹⁰ Huzar v Jet2.com Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 791, [2014] 1 WLR 3232.

¹¹ Dawson v Thomson Airways Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 845, [2015] QB 123.

¹² Nelson v Deutsche Lufthansa AG (Joined Cases C-581/10 and C-629/10) [2013] QB 80.¹³ Civil Aviation Authority, ‘Delayed and Cancelled Flights’ https://www.caa.co.uk accessed [insert date].

¹⁴ Department for Transport, ‘Air Passenger Rights’ https://www.gov.uk accessed [insert date].

¹⁵ European Commission, Interpretative Guidelines on Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 [2016] OJ C214/04.

¹⁶ Civil Procedure Rules 1998, Part 27 (Small Claims Track).