header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
02 June 2021 / Daniel Black
Issue: 7935 / Categories: Features , Aviation , EU
printer mail-detail

Extraordinary events & flight compensation: turbulent times?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
50419
In the light of a recent case, Daniel Black discusses the approach to balancing the interests of airlines with compensation claims for consumers
  • Lipton v BA City Flyer: a misstep by the Court of Appeal on ‘extraordinary circumstances’ and flight compensation claims?

Under Regulation (EC) 2547 No 261/2004 (the Regulation) passengers whose flight is cancelled or is sufficiently delayed are entitled to statutory compensation. It is a necessary but not sufficient (more on which later) condition for an airline to escape the default position of paying-out that the cancellation (or qualifying delay—being a delay amounting to at least three hours on arrival) was caused by ‘extraordinary circumstances’. As well as considering this issue, the case of Lipton v BA City Flyer [2021] EWCA Civ 454, [2021] All ER (D) 129 (Mar) is additionally of importance in confirming that the Regulation is part of UK law after Brexit (albeit in an altered form), and because of Lord Justice Green’s analysis of the operation and interpretation of EU derived

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

Read All
Sponsored by
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
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
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?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
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
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
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
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll