CJEU CASE C-405/23, TOURISTIC AVIATION SERVICES LTD V FLIGHTRIGHT GMBH Although the Court also recalls that these two conditions are cumulative, it seems that over the years the main criterion used by the Court to consider that an event constitutes an extraordinary circumstance has become whether the event originates inside or outside the air carrier. Thus, the following events whose origin is "internal" cannot be qualified as extraordinary circumstances : - a technical problem, which arose unexpectedly, which is not attributable to defective maintenance and which was not detected during regular maintenance either (CJEU, 22 December 2008 Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia, Case C-549/07 , CJEU 17 September 2015 Van der Lans v/Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV, Case C257/14); - an internal strike either a “wildcat strike”(CJEU, 17 April 2018, Helga Krüsemann and Others v TUIfly GmbH, Joined Cases C195/17, C-197/17 to C-203/17) or a strike organized by a trade union representing the staff of an air carrier aimed in particular at obtaining wage increases CJEU, 23 March 2021 in AirHelp v Scandinavian Airlines System SAS, C-28/20); - the unexpected death of the co-pilot, as the management of an unexpected absence, due to illness or death, of one or more members of staff whose presence is essential to the operation of a flight, including shortly before the departure of that flight remains intrinsically linked to the question of crew planning and staff working hours, with the result that such an unexpected event is inherent in the normal exercise of the operating air carrier’s activity (CJEU 11 May 2023 in joined cases C-156/22 to C-158/22 | TAP Portugal). On the other hand, according to the Court of Justice, the concept of extraordinary circumstances includes the occurrence of so-called "external" events resulting from the air carrier's activity and from external circumstances, which in practice occur more or less frequently, but over
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==