On 16 January 2025, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a significant ruling in Case C-642/23, in which it clarified the refund rights of passengers in the event of a cancelled flight under EU Regulation 261/2004.
Background of the Case
The case concerned a passenger travelling from Düsseldorf to Brisbane, with a stopover in Abu Dhabi, whose flight from Düsseldorf to Abu Dhabi was cancelled. The airline offered the passenger compensation in the form of miles to be credited to a loyalty programme. The passenger registered for the programme but ultimately did not receive the promised miles.
In the first instance, the passenger claimed a full refund of the ticket price in cash. However, she had not specified the amount. The court rejected her claim, reasoning that she had failed to do so and that she could only claim compensation for the outbound flight. On appeal, the passenger claimed €1,189.00 plus interest, covering both the outbound and return flights.
The German court then referred preliminary questions to the CJEU regarding the interpretation of Article 8(1)(a) and Article 7(3) of Regulation 261/2004. The legal provisions state:
- Article 8(1)(a) stipulates that passengers whose flights are cancelled are entitled to a full refund of their ticket within seven days, at the price at which it was purchased.
- Article 7(3) states that this refund must be made in cash, by bank transfer, bank cheque, or, with the passenger’s written consent, in the form of travel vouchers or other services.
The preliminary questions were as follows:
- Is a passenger bound to a refund in miles if they register for a loyalty programme without providing explicit written consent?
- Can a passenger demand a cash refund if the airline fails to credit the promised miles?
The Court’s Ruling
The CJEU ruled that a passenger is not deemed to have given written consent for a refund in the form of travel vouchers or miles simply by registering for a loyalty programme. Valid consent requires explicit, final, and unequivocal acceptance.
Since the first question was answered in the negative, the Court did not need to address the second question.
Implications for Passengers and Airlines
This ruling confirms that airlines cannot automatically bind passengers to alternative compensation such as miles or vouchers. Passengers retain the right to a cash refund unless they have explicitly, definitively, and unequivocally agreed to an alternative form of compensation.
For airlines, this decision underscores the need for greater transparency in their compensation offers and the necessity of obtaining explicit passenger consent.
Conclusion
This ruling strengthens consumer rights in air travel and highlights the importance of clear and voluntary consent in alternative compensation arrangements. For travellers facing flight cancellations, it provides additional protection against unwanted compensation methods.
More information
If you have any questions based on this article, please contact our Trade, Industry, and Logistics specialists:
