# C_2020279EN.01003702.xml

| 24.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 279/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 279/37

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Korneuburg (Austria) lodged on 15 June 2020 — Airhelp Limited v Laudamotion GmbH

(Case C-263/20)

(2020/C 279/50)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesgericht Korneuburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Airhelp Limited

Defendant: Laudamotion GmbH

Questions referred

| 1. | Are Article 5(1)(c) and Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the passenger has a right to compensation where the original time of departure of 14.40 is brought forward to 8.25 on the same day? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are Article 5(1)(c) and Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the passenger has a right to compensation where the original time of departure of 14.40 is brought forward to 8.25 on the same day?

| 2. | Is Article 5(1)(c)(i) to (iii) of Regulation No 261/2004 to be interpreted as meaning that examination as to whether the passenger is informed of the cancellation is to be conducted solely in accordance with that provision and precludes the application of national law on the receipt of declarations which was enacted in transposition of Directive 2000/31/EC (2) and includes a provision whereby declarations are deemed to be received? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is Article 5(1)(c)(i) to (iii) of Regulation No 261/2004 to be interpreted as meaning that examination as to whether the passenger is informed of the cancellation is to be conducted solely in accordance with that provision and precludes the application of national law on the receipt of declarations which was enacted in transposition of Directive 2000/31/EC (2) and includes a provision whereby declarations are deemed to be received?

| 3. | Are Article 5(1)(c)(i) to (iii) of Regulation No 261/2004 and Article 11 of Directive 2000/31 to be interpreted as meaning that, where a passenger reserved a flight via a booking platform and provided his telephone number and email address, but the booking platform forwarded to the air carrier the telephone number and an email address that was generated automatically by the booking platform, delivery to the automatically generated email address of the notification that the flight has been brought forward is to be regarded as information or delivery of notification that the flight has been brought forward, even where the booking platform does not forward, or delays forwarding, the air carrier’s notification to the passenger? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Are Article 5(1)(c)(i) to (iii) of Regulation No 261/2004 and Article 11 of Directive 2000/31 to be interpreted as meaning that, where a passenger reserved a flight via a booking platform and provided his telephone number and email address, but the booking platform forwarded to the air carrier the telephone number and an email address that was generated automatically by the booking platform, delivery to the automatically generated email address of the notification that the flight has been brought forward is to be regarded as information or delivery of notification that the flight has been brought forward, even where the booking platform does not forward, or delays forwarding, the air carrier’s notification to the passenger?

---

(1)  Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).

(2)  Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on electronic commerce’) (OJ 2000 L 178, p. 1).

---