Case C-83/10

Aurora Sousa Rodríguez and Others

v

Air France SA

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Juzgado de lo Mercantil nº 1 de Pontevedra)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Air transport – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Article 2(l) – Compensation for passengers in the event of cancellation of a flight – Meaning of ‘cancellation’ – Article 12 – Meaning of ‘further compensation’ – Compensation under national law)

Summary of the Judgment

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 – Annulment – Meaning

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 261/2004, Arts 2(l) and 5(3))

2.        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 – Further compensation – Scope – Cover of non-material damage – Included

(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 261/2004, Arts 8, 9 and 12, Montreal Convention of 1999)

1.        ‘Cancellation’, as defined in 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, and repealing Regulation No 295/91, must be interpreted as meaning that it does not refer only to the situation in which the aeroplane in question fails to take off at all, but also covers the case in which that aeroplane took off but, for whatever reason, was subsequently forced to return to the airport of departure where the passengers of that aeroplane were transferred to other flights.

The reason why the aeroplane was forced to return to the airport of departure is, in this connection, irrelevant. It is of relevance only in order to determine whether, depending on the circumstances, that cancellation is ‘caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken’ within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004, in which case no compensation is payable.

(see paras 34-35, operative part 1)

2.        The term ‘further compensation’, used in Article 12 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, and repealing Regulation No 295/91, must be interpreted as allowing the national court to award compensation, under the conditions provided for by the Convention for the unification of certain rules for international carriage by air or national law, for damage, including non-material damage, arising from breach of a contract of carriage by air. In contrast, the notion of ‘further compensation’ may not serve as the legal basis for the national court to order an air carrier to reimburse to passengers whose flight has been delayed or cancelled the expenses the latter have had to incur because of the failure of that carrier to fulfil its obligations to assist and provide care under Article 8 and Article 9 of Regulation No 261/2004.

(see para. 46, operative part 2)