Court of Cassation

Flights: from viruses to political instability – when cancellation is justified

In exceptional circumstances, airlines are exempt from the obligation to pay financial compensation

A passenger plane passes in front of the moon as it makes its landing approach to Heathrow Airport, which said during the weekend that the third runway may not be operational until 2039, in London, Britain, September 28, 2026.  REUTERS/Toby Melville       TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY REUTERS

2' min read

Translated by AI
Versione italiana

2' min read

Translated by AI
Versione italiana

Political instability, unfavourable weather conditions, safety risks, sudden safety-related shortcomings in the flight and strikes that affect the operations of an air carrier. These are some of the exceptional circumstances that justify the cancellation of a flight and therefore exempt airlines from the obligation to pay passengers left on the ground financial compensation for the inconvenience suffered, which is generally provided for regardless of proof of financial or other damage incurred.

The trip to Thailand fell through

The Court of Cassation has thus dismissed the appeal of a passenger whose dream of leaving Milan for the charm and spirituality of Thailand had been dashed: a trip to Bangkok cancelled on grounds of public health, during the pandemic. The magistrate’s court had ruled in favour of the airline’s customer, whilst the Court of Appeal had ruled against him. The Supreme Court agrees with the latter. During the Covid pandemic, in fact, the airline had been able to invoke the occurrence of exceptional circumstances that left it no room for manoeuvre. But health risks are certainly not the only reason that allows airlines to avoid liability for financial compensation – in the event that departures are cancelled – whilst remaining in full compliance with national and international regulations.

Loading...

Exceptional circumstances

Exceptional circumstances arise, in fact, ‘in the event of political instability, weather conditions incompatible with the operation of the flight, safety risks, sudden safety-related shortcomings in the flight, and strikes affecting the operations of an air carrier’. This is a broad range of circumstances, which in the case under consideration included the pandemic emergency, but which encompasses many other possibilities.

No lump-sum compensation – ranging from 250 euros to 600 euros – was, for example, payable for the eruption of Mount Etna which led to the cancellation of flights to and from Catania and Comiso, until the volcano allowed take-offs to resume. Airspace was closed due to instability caused by recent conflicts in Iran or the Middle East, whilst many departures were rescheduled due to the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz, which led to restrictions on fuel supplies: events which fall within the category of exceptional circumstances.

Ticket refunds and the right to assistance are provided, but compensation is excluded even in the case of technical faults or problems with ENAV’s radar systems, which are beyond the carrier’s control.

Before taking the matter to court, it is therefore important to establish whether the flight was ‘cancelled’ for reasons that the airline could have foreseen or dealt with, or due to ‘force majeure’. In the latter case, if the matter goes to court, there is also a risk of having to pay one’s own legal costs, as happened in the case in question.

Copyright reserved ©
Loading...

Brand connect

Loading...

Newsletter

Notizie e approfondimenti sugli avvenimenti politici, economici e finanziari.

Iscriviti