Decision to review — ECLI:EU:C:2026:212
Date: 2026-03-12
Language of the case: Polish

Decision of the Court (Reviewing Chamber) of 12 March 2026 to review the judgment of the General Court (Fifth Chamber, sitting with five Judges) delivered on 21 January 2026 in Case T-134/25, D (Air traffic management decision) (Case C-108/26 RX) Language of the case: Polish Referring court Sąd Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy w Warszawie Parties to the proceedings before the General Court Applicant: D S.A. Defendant: P S.A. Questions to be reviewed The review shall concern the question whether, having regard in particular to the judgments of the Court of Justice of 31 January 2013, McDonagh (C-12/11, EU:C:2013:43), and of 23 March 2021, Airhelp (C-28/20, EU:C:2021:226), the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 21 January 2026, D (Air traffic management decision) (T-134/25, EU:T:2026:35), adversely affects the unity or consistency of EU law inasmuch as the General Court ruled that: – an air traffic management decision is not inherent, by its nature or origin, in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned, since it does not form part of that carrier’s activity but falls within the activities and competence of the air traffic management services; – such a decision, irrespective of the reason for it, is beyond the actual control of that carrier, provided that the carrier did not contribute to that decision; and – consequently, Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 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, must be interpreted as meaning that such a decision may constitute an ‘extraordinary circumstance’, within the meaning of that provision, irrespective of the duration of the delay entailed and the reason for it, if it is established that that decision was beyond the actual control of the air carrier concerned, in particular where it can be ruled out that that carrier contributed to that decision. ____________