EU Flight Delay Compensation: Air-Traffic Rules Explained

Airlines cannot automatically deny flight delay compensation simply by stating that air-traffic control restrictions caused the delay. This is according to a recent ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union. Passengers who experience significant flight delays may still be entitled to compensation, even if air-traffic management decisions were involved. The court clarified that airlines must prove that such restrictions were due to extraordinary circumstances beyond their control.

This decision, Case C‑108/26 RX, D (Air traffic management decision), Judgment No. 144/2026, overturns a previous interpretation by the General Court. It means that simply citing airspace restrictions is not enough for an airline to avoid paying compensation. Instead, carriers must identify the specific event that led to the restriction and demonstrate that it was exceptional and outside of their operational control. This ruling aims to ensure a more consistent application of EU flight delay compensation laws.

Understanding Extraordinary Circumstances

For airlines to avoid paying compensation for flight delays, they must prove that the delay was caused by an “extraordinary circumstance.” This term refers to events that are not inherent in the normal operation of an airline and are beyond its effective control. Examples of such events can include extreme weather conditions, political instability, or unexpected security risks. However, routine technical problems or issues that airlines commonly face are generally not considered extraordinary.

The Court of Justice of the European Union has emphasized that air-traffic management decisions, such as airspace closures or control instructions, do not automatically qualify as extraordinary circumstances. Airlines must investigate the root cause of these restrictions. If the restriction was due to something like bad weather, the airline must show that the weather was exceptionally severe and made safe flight operations impossible. If the cause is something more common, like air traffic controller strikes, it may not be considered extraordinary.

How Combined Delays Are Assessed

In cases where a flight delay results from a combination of an extraordinary event and another cause, the court has provided further guidance. If a flight is delayed by both an exceptional circumstance and another factor, such as a technical fault, the airline must calculate the portion of the delay attributable to the extraordinary event. This amount should then be deducted from the total delay time. The passenger may still be eligible for compensation if the remaining delay, caused by factors within the airline’s control, meets the required threshold.

For example, if a flight is delayed by a total of five hours, and three hours are proven to be due to an extraordinary weather event, the remaining two hours might still qualify for compensation if the airline was responsible for them. The threshold for compensation under Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004 can include delays of three hours or more upon final arrival at the destination. This means that even with an extraordinary event, passengers might still receive compensation if the airline’s own issues contributed significantly to the delay.

The Airline’s Burden of Proof

The responsibility lies with the airline to prove that a delay meets the criteria for an extraordinary circumstance. This involves more than just stating that air-traffic control imposed a restriction. The airline must provide evidence to support its claim, including identifying the specific event, demonstrating its exceptional nature, and showing that it directly impacted the safe and timely operation of the flight. They also need to quantify how much time was added to the delay because of this exceptional event.

If an airline cannot successfully demonstrate that the delay was due to an extraordinary circumstance, then compensation may still be payable under EU law. A technical fault, for instance, does not automatically become an extraordinary circumstance just because it happened at the same time as an air-traffic restriction. The case will then return to the national courts, like the Polish court in this instance, to determine the specific facts and whether the airline has met its obligations. This ensures that passengers are not unfairly denied their rights due to vague or unsubstantiated claims by airlines.

Frequently Asked Questions