header-logo header-logo

06 September 2024 / Anna Medvinskaia , Jack Brady
Issue: 8084 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , In Court , Consumer
printer mail-detail

Pilot sickness: a cure for compensation claims?

188094
Anna Medvinskaia & Jack Brady analyse the Supreme Court’s decision in Lipton v BA Cityflyer Ltd
  • Pilot sickness is not an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ for the purposes of Art 5(3) of Regulation (EC) 261/2004.
  • This article considers the application of retained EU law, in particular the existence of accrued EU law rights and the way in which those rights are carried forward post-Brexit.
  • It shows how under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, UK courts are not bound by post-Brexit CJEU judgments and cannot refer questions to the CJEU.

Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (Regulation 261) on the rights of passengers travelling by air is one of the most litigated pieces of legislation to come out of the EU. A key issue that the courts continue to grapple with is the application of Art 5(3) of Regulation 261, which exempts operating carriers from the obligation to pay compensation to passengers if they can prove that the cancellation or long delay was caused by ‘extraordinary circumstances which

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll