Landmark case begins on Ryanair ash cloud claim

THE EUROPEAN Court of Justice will today hear a landmark case involving Ryanair and the rights of passengers affected by natural…

THE EUROPEAN Court of Justice will today hear a landmark case involving Ryanair and the rights of passengers affected by natural events such as the ash cloud generated by volcanic eruptions.

In March 2010 the Eyjafjallajokull volcano erupted in Iceland, resulting in the creation of a huge ash cloud over Europe which closed swathes of European airspace from April 15th to 23rd, grounding aircraft and leading to the cancellation of hundreds of flights.

Among them was that of Denise McDonagh of Terenure, Dublin, who was stranded in Faro, Portugal on April 17th of that year due to the cancellation of her flight.

She sued Ryanair in Dublin Metropolitan District Court for the payment of €1,129 – the costs she incurred as a result of the cancellation. Ms McDonagh claimed Ryanair did not provide her with the level of care set out in article 9 of the EU regulation 261/2004 on air passenger rights. That states care and assistance must be provided by an airline in the event of a flight being delayed, even due to extraordinary circumstances. This cover extends to hotel accommodation.

READ MORE

Ryanair has argued the closure of airspace went beyond extraordinary circumstances and that it shouldn’t be liable for associated passenger costs.

The Dublin Metropolitan District Court asked the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg for an interpretation of the regulation.

The questions referred to the court ask whether circumstances such as those caused by the Eyjafjallajokull volcano go beyond the “extraordinary circumstances” referred to in the regulation; if they do, is there liability to provide care as provided for in the regulation; if they do not, are the articles requiring care going beyond the UN Montreal convention dealing with passenger rights and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.

The court asked if the relevant articles in the regulation should be interpreted as including an implied limitation on the amount that should be paid in the event of cancellation, and if not, do they violate the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination?

The outcome will affect the aviation industry throughout the EU.