Order — ECLI:EU:C:2016:753
Date: 2016-10-05
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: Transport
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary — Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber), 5 October 2016 1. Transport — Air transport — Regulation No 261/2004 — Common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights — Cancellation — Definition — Flight making an unscheduled stopover — Not included (European Parliament and Council Directive 261/2004, Arts 2(l), 5(1)(c) and 7) 2. EU law — Interpretation in accordance with primary law as a whole — Scope 1. Article 2(l) of Regulation No 261/2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights must be interpreted as meaning that a flight in respect of which the places of departure and arrival accorded with the planned schedule but during which an unscheduled stopover took place cannot be regarded as cancelled. In that regard, first, it is common ground that the objective of Regulation No 261/2004, as is clear from recitals 1, 2 and 4 thereof, is to ensure a high level of protection for passengers and consumers, by strengthening their rights in a number of situations involving serious trouble and inconvenience, and also redressing those situations in a standardised and immediate manner. The fact that a flight gave rise to an unscheduled stopover is not at all a situation involving in itself, for the passengers, serious trouble or inconvenience such as that arising from a denied boarding, a cancellation or a lengthy delay, compensation for which is provided for by Regulation No 261/2004, as interpreted by the Court. Such serious trouble and inconvenience would only arise if the stopover means that the aircraft making the flight at issue reaches its final destination with a delay equal to or in excess of three hours compared with the scheduled time of arrival, a situation which, in principle, gives rise to the passenger’s right to compensation laid down in Article 5(1)(c) and Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004, as interpreted by the Court. Second, if a flight that arrives at its planned final destination after an unscheduled stopover were equated to a cancellation that would recognise the right of compensation to a passenger who, owing to the unscheduled stopover, suffered a delay in arriving of less than three hours, whilst a passenger who suffered the identical delay for a different reason would not have a right to the compensation provided for by Article 5(1)(c) and Article 7 of Regulation No 261/2004, as interpreted by the Court and, therefore, would be contrary to the principal of equal treatment. (see paras 22-25, 27, operative part) 2. See the text of the decision. (see para. 26)