Brussels, 29/07/2016 (Agence Europe) - The collision of a bird with an aircraft by no means constitutes an extraordinary circumstance, according to the opinion of Advocate General Yves Bot, on Thursday 28 July, who went on to state that an airline cannot deny passengers compensation on these grounds.
This prejudicial question (case C-315/15) was put to the Court of Justice of the EU by a Czech court, to which a dispute between two passengers and an airline had been brought. European legislation does indeed provide for compensation for passengers in the event of delays of more than three hours. However, airlines are not obliged to compensate passengers if they can prove that the delay was due to extraordinary circumstances.
The Advocate General found that this argument does not hold water in the event of a bird strike. He also pointed out that an “extraordinary” circumstance can be invoked only if an event is not inherent to the normal exercise of the airline's activities on the basis of its nature and origin. However, Advocate General Bot found that an aircraft colliding with a bird comes within the normal exercise of an airline's activities, even though it lies outside that airline's control.
He stated that, when aircraft are produced, the most exposed parts which are likely to be involved in a collision of this kind are subjected to tests in order for an airworthiness certificate to be issued. Furthermore, most airports rely on various methods to disperse birds. Finally, pilots themselves can ask for birds and, more generally, any kind of animal to be removed from the runway areas.
The Court is expected to rule on the case fairly soon, given its relative lack of complexity, and the final judgement is expected by the autumn, a source told us. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)