Brussels, 23/03/2012 (Agence Europe) - The closure of airspace because of the eruption of a volcano constitutes “extraordinary circumstances” which require airlines to provide care to passengers whose flights have been cancelled. EU law does not imply either release from, or temporal or monetary limitation of, the obligation to provide care to passengers, said Advocate General Yves Bot in an opinion delivered on 22 March in Case C-12/11.
The Court of Justice has to respond to questions put by the Dublin Metropolitan District Court (Ireland), which is hearing a complaint by a passenger booked on a Ryanair flight which was cancelled following the eruption of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano in Iceland in April 2010. The passenger claims that Ryanair did not provide her with the necessary assistance and owes her around €1,130 by way of compensation or damages, to cover the costs which she incurred for meals, refreshments, accommodation and transport. The Irish court asked the Court, firstly, whether the closure of airspace owing to the eruption of a volcano is covered by the notion of “extraordinary circumstances”, which, under the terms of Regulation EC 261/2004 rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights requires the air carrier to provide care for the passengers, and, secondly, whether the obligation to provide care must be limited, in temporal or monetary terms.
The advocate general points out first of all that the notion of “extraordinary circumstances” refers to “an event which is not inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and is beyond the actual control of that carrier on account of its nature or origin”. He finds that the eruption of a volcano is, indeed, covered by this notion and notes that, by contrast with the obligation for the air carrier to pay compensation - which does not apply where the air carrier can prove that the cancellation of the flight was the result of extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided - the obligation to provide care “must remain compelling, whatever the event which resulted in the cancellation and whether or not the air carrier was responsible for that event” in order to provide protection for passengers who are particularly vulnerable when stranded at an airport. He observes, further, that the EU legislation does not imply any limitation - temporal or monetary - of the obligation to provide care to the passengers. (FG/transl.rt)