Lars J
Veteran
Synes det er rart at feil på flyet ikke er flyselskapet sitt ansvar?
Her var det da en hydraulic leak som ødela reisen.
Det er slått fast i rettsvesenet tidligere at de fleste tekniske feil ikke er ekstraordinært.
Unntak kan være :
Nevertheless, certain technical problems may constitute extraordinary circumstances. That would be the case in the situation where it was revealed by the manufacturer of the aircraft comprising the fleet of the air carrier concerned, or by a competent authority, that those aircraft, although already in service, are affected by a hidden manufacturing defect which impinges on flight safety.
Det virker ikke være tilfelle her, og du bør ha krav på EU261.
Da er det irrelevant om Swiss har gjort alt i sin makt for å unngå forsinkelse.
Noen saker du kan henvise til Swiss
Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 17 September 2015.
Having regard to all of the foregoing considerations, the answer to the questions referred is that Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that a technical problem, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which occurred unexpectedly, which is not attributable to poor maintenance and which was also not detected during routine maintenance checks, does not fall within the definition of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ within the meaning of that provision.
In the judgment in Wallentin-Hermann (C‑549/07, EU:C:2008:771), the Court held that the resolution of technical problems is inherent in the exercise of the activity of the air carrier concerned and cannot be classified as extraordinary circumstances.