Agö
Medlem
Nytt intressant avgörande från högsta instans. Notera återigen tvåstegsraketen. Skruv på runway som skadar däck är extraordinärt men flygbolaget har alltjämt att visa att de har gjort allt i sin makt för satt se till så att man fixar problemet och att det inte leder till längre försening. Mycket vettigt domslut som återigen slår fast att bolaget har ett extra ansvar även vid extraordinära händelser. Det funkar inte att bara ge upp eller slappa. Dessutom säger domstolen att flygbolagen har en skyldighet att ha reservdäck på plats på alla flygplatser de flyger på m.m. - detta bör kunna påverka bedömningen i fall flygbolag måste flyga in "normala" reservdelar.
Judgment in Case C-501/17Germanwingsv Wolfgang Pauels
"An air carrier is only required to compensate passengers for a delay of three hours or more where an aircraft tyre is damaged by a screw lying on the runway if it fails to prove that it deployed all means at its disposal for limiting the delay of the flight."
The Court considers that, although air carriers are regularly faced with damage to the tyres of their aircraft, where the malfunctioning of a tyre is the sole result of impact with a foreign object lying on the airport runway, it cannot be regarded as inherent, by its nature or origin, in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned. In addition, those circumstances are outside that carrier’s actual control. They are therefore extraordinary circumstances within the meaning of the air passenger rights regulation.
However, in order for its obligation to pay compensation under the air passenger rights regulation to be excluded, an air carrier must also prove that it deployed all its resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposalin order to avoid the changing of a tyre damaged by a foreign object lying on the airport runway from leading to long delay of the flight in question. In that regard, specifically in respect of damage to tyres, the Court notes that air carriers are able to have at their disposal, in all airports from which they operate, contracts for changing tyres under which they are afforded priority treatment."
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2019-04/cp190045en.pdf
Judgment in Case C-501/17Germanwingsv Wolfgang Pauels
"An air carrier is only required to compensate passengers for a delay of three hours or more where an aircraft tyre is damaged by a screw lying on the runway if it fails to prove that it deployed all means at its disposal for limiting the delay of the flight."
The Court considers that, although air carriers are regularly faced with damage to the tyres of their aircraft, where the malfunctioning of a tyre is the sole result of impact with a foreign object lying on the airport runway, it cannot be regarded as inherent, by its nature or origin, in the normal exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned. In addition, those circumstances are outside that carrier’s actual control. They are therefore extraordinary circumstances within the meaning of the air passenger rights regulation.
However, in order for its obligation to pay compensation under the air passenger rights regulation to be excluded, an air carrier must also prove that it deployed all its resources in terms of staff or equipment and the financial means at its disposalin order to avoid the changing of a tyre damaged by a foreign object lying on the airport runway from leading to long delay of the flight in question. In that regard, specifically in respect of damage to tyres, the Court notes that air carriers are able to have at their disposal, in all airports from which they operate, contracts for changing tyres under which they are afforded priority treatment."
https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2019-04/cp190045en.pdf