UK 261 / EU 261- do EU rulings apply post brexit? (England) - FlyerTalk Forums (2024)

neilnad

Join Date: Jun 2024

Posts: 3

need some advice on a compensation dispute with an airline and I'm not sure about the legal arguments involved. Here are the details:

Basic Summary

1. I was due to fly on flight SQ321 leaving Heathrow at 22:05 on 23 April 2024.
   
2. On the day of the flight I received another email stating the flight had been cancelled and we had been moved to an earlier flight, SQ319, departing at 20:50. We arrived a couple of hours early vs our original flight times.
   

Main issue:

The airline admitted we are entitled to compensation under Regulation UK261 and offered a settlement of £260 per person. They claimed that since we landed not more than four hours later than the original flight, we were only due half of the maximum £520, according to Article 7(2) of Regulation UK261. We actually landed earlier then originally intended.

However, another poster kindly pointed to the following case. The case is Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 21 December 2021 - AD and Others v Corendon Airlines and Others, Joined Cases C-146/20, C-188/20, C-196/20, and C-270/20. I

The judgment states: "Article 7(2) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that it is not applicable to a situation in which the amount of time by which the arrival of a flight has been brought forward is within the limits referred to in that provision."

My Questions:

1. Is my interpretation of the legal case correct?
   
2. Does the EU case law apply to the UK now?
   
3. The airline is not a member of any ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) scheme so I will be starting a small claims court review
   

Thanks!

demue

Join Date: May 2004

Location: SIN (LEJ once a year)

Programs: SQ, LH, BA, IHG Diamond AMB, HH Gold, SLH Indulged, Accor Gold, Hyatt Discoverist

Posts: 7,843

My personal take (not a lawyer) is that you can't apply EUCJ rulings to non-member states.

Switzerland does recognize EU261/4 regulations AFAIK, but Swiss courts don't apply / follow EU Court of Justice rulings and neither do airlines like Swiss (LX) recognize them.

I would think with the UK this may be similar where you have UK261, but only rulings by British courts would apply post Brexit. YMMV.

abraxias

Join Date: Jun 2015

Location: Birmingham

Programs: BA Gold, HH Gold

Posts: 298

SK AAR

Join Date: Nov 2004

Location: Denmark

Programs: TK Elite

Posts: 12,096

Excuse me, but you want to sue the airline for remaining half, 260 GBP because you were rebooked to SQ319 and departed 1h15min earlier than your scheduled flight?

Maybe just accept the 260 GBP for each passenger - which seems fair and very generous in this situation - and move on?

neilnad

Join Date: Jun 2024

Posts: 3

Its also about the fact that singapore airlines are ignoring a court ruling.

Thanks, disappointing to hear. I wonder how this will go if it goes to small claims court

Last edited by NewbieRunner; Jun 15, 2024 at 4:54 amReason: Merged consecutive posts by same member

night718

Join Date: Jul 2018

Posts: 310

SQ got you to your destination early and gave you money.

I would understand if they got you there late, but this is just greedy.

carrotjuice

Join Date: Apr 2007

Location: Anywhere

Posts: 6,680

There's a very thriving and informative thread on EU/UK 261 at the BA forum:
The 2024 BA compensation thread: Your guide to Regulation EC261 / UK261

The topic of compensation is clearly surmised in that thread, particularly (the portions that are applicable to OP's case has been bolded):

Q1: When am I entitled to compensation?
A1: You are entitled to compensation if you are involuntarily denied boarding or if your flight is delayed more than 3 hours. Delays under 3 hours are not eligible for compensation. In case of cancellation, you are also entitled to compensation in the following circ*mstances:
a) You are given less than 7 days’ notice of the cancellation and you are offered rerouting which leaves more than an hour earlier than originally scheduled or arrives at your final destination more than 2 hours later than originally scheduled.
b) You are given between two weeks and 7 days’ notice of the cancellation and you are offered rerouting which leaves more than 2 hours earlier than originally scheduled or arrives at your final destination more than 4 hours later than originally scheduled.

3) ... compensation payments are now denominated in Pounds Sterling, rather than Euros. This would apply to a flight leaving the UK OR for a flight to the UK from outside the European space...
So 250€ becomes £220 (short delays, typically within Europe),
400€ is £350 (typically longer flights within Europe) and finally
600€ - usually for longhaul flights -- is now £520.
These sums can continue to be cut in half if BA rebooks you on earlier flights such that you arrive before your original scheduled time.

In conclusion, what SQ has offered to you is perfectly in line with the regulation.

Singapore_Air

Join Date: Sep 2001

Location: Singapore

Posts: 2,336

carrotjuice

Join Date: Apr 2007

Location: Anywhere

Posts: 6,680

But it's - rightly or wrongly - the law from the jurisdiction in which it operates, a "cost of doing business" in a manner of speaking.

What beggars belief is OP wanting to go to the Small Claims Court for "more".

demue

Join Date: May 2004

Location: SIN (LEJ once a year)

Programs: SQ, LH, BA, IHG Diamond AMB, HH Gold, SLH Indulged, Accor Gold, Hyatt Discoverist

Posts: 7,843

As has been mentioned already, a court ruling that is not applicable to the jurisdiction the flight operated from.

If you want a UK court to arrive at the same conclusion than EUCJ then yes, you'll have to pursue this case in the UK and plead the case accordingly and see if a UK court rules / follows the same argument that the EUCJ did in the other case you referenced.

You are getting, without hassle, what you are owed under UK261 regulations, so anything you feel entitled to beyond that you'll have to pursue the legal avenue and see where it leads you to.

Personally, would I do it? No, but it's not my decision. There are airlines out there blatantly ignoring existing laws, those should be pursued for sure, but this case is a different matter. SQ handled your entire situation rather well IMHO. YMMV.

neilnad

Join Date: Jun 2024

Posts: 3

Thanks but part of that same post (post 8) also mentions:

Azurair and the 50% haircut
If you are rebooked, typically due to a cancelled flight, BA may put you on a service that departs earlier than your original booking. If it's more than 1 hour early it's still valid for compensation (so long as the flight was not cancelled for Extraordinary Circ*mstances). However BA, and many other airlines, are in the habit of using a particular reading of EC261 to cut the compensation due by 50%, on the basis that you arrived less than (say) 2 hours late. This interpretation is wrong and the CJEU has ruled in Azurair that this provision does not apply if you depart more than an hour early, since the inconvenience can often be greater than leaving 2 hours late. CEDR agrees with this, so if BA does cut your compensation on this basis, consider going to CEDR.

Why should I be ashamed to claim what is mine based on the law?

Last edited by NewbieRunner; Jun 15, 2024 at 4:55 amReason: Merged consecutive posts by same member

sbs2716g

Join Date: Jun 2017

Posts: 2,318

Anyway SQ319 on 23/4 departed late.

so actual departure is within 1hr of SQ321.

night718

Join Date: Jul 2018

Posts: 310

The law is there to protect people from losing time and money.

SQ auto rebooked you on a slightly earlier flight (you gained time) and you received money.

Based on the details you've shared, it doesn't seem like you were inconvenienced in any way.

Aside from your interpretation of the law, why do you feel like you are entitled to compensation?

uhoo

Join Date: Jan 2005

Posts: 193

Last edited by uhoo; Jun 15, 2024 at 4:07 pm

SK AAR

Join Date: Nov 2004

Location: Denmark

Programs: TK Elite

Posts: 12,096

Don't believe everything you read in the BA compensation thread about UK261/EC Reg. 261/04. Many of the posters there have developed way too positive opinions on the obligation of the airline to rebook etc and are not in line with correct interpretation of the regulation. I have been flamed many times when trying to suggest some realisme in what BA and other airlines are actually obliged to do under UK261 / EC reg. 261/04.

The ECJ matter you refer to, the Azurair and Others vs Corendon Airlines is not applicable as it didn't deal w/ cancellation of a flight and rebooking following that cancellation.