ISSN 2184-8793 ISSNe 2975-9056 by distance between the departure and the final destination. In the Bossen61 case, the CJEU explained that the calculation only observes the distance between the initial take-off location at the final destination, disregarding connecting flights.62 This ruling alleviates the financial burden on the air carrier by focusing on the primary flight segments. 4. Extraordinary circumstances as a way out for air carriers Extraordinary circumstances serve as an exception to the general rule of compensating passengers for delays or flight cancellations. In recent years, the CJEU has issued numerous rulings that shed light on the evolution of this rule and shape its interpretation. The airline is not obligated to pay compensation under Article 7 if it can prove that the flight cancellation is due to extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided even if all appropriate measures had been taken.63 Although the provision explicitly addresses only flight cancellations, this exception also applies to delays,64 but not to denied boarding.65 The Regulation, in recital 14 of its preamble, provides examples of when extraordinary circumstances may occur. These include political instability, adverse weather conditions, security risks, unforeseen technical deficiencies affecting flight safety, as well as strikes affecting the airline's operations. The listed examples do not automatically constitute the existence of extraordinary circumstances and exemption from the obligation to pay compensation. They only represent events that, may potentially lead to such an outcome.66 Due to the ambiguity of what constitutes extraordinary circumstances, the CJEU has developed the following criteria in its practice that should be met for an event to be classified as extraordinary circumstances: 1. The nature or origin of the event should not be inherent in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned; and 2. the event is beyond the air carrier's actual control.67 As explained, the above is not sufficient to exempt the carrier from paying compensation; who must also prove the following: 1. The extraordinary circumstances could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken; and 2. where such circumstances did arise, the air carrier adopted measures appropriate to the situation, deploying all its resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposal in order to avoid that situation (without the air carrier being required to make intolerable sacrifices).68 61 Case C-559/16, Bossen of 7 September 2017. 62 Ibid., para. 29. 63 Art. 5(3) of the Regulation. 64 Joined cases C-402/07 and C-432/07, Sturgeon of 19 November 2009, paras. 67 and 69. 65 Case C-22/11, Finnair of 4 October 2012, para. 36. 66 Case C-195/17, Krüsemann of 17 April 2018, para. 34; Pazos, 2021, p. 742. 67 Case C-549/07, Wallentin-Hermann of 22 December 2008, paras. 23, 27 in 34. 68 Case C-74/19, Transportes Aéreos Portugueses of 11 June 2020, paras 36 and 57; Case C-501/17, Germanwings of 4 April 2019, para. 19.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==