Irish low-cost airline Ryanair should have fully compensated a passenger whose flight was cancelled because of the volcanic ash cloud in 2010, the EU’s top court has said.
On such occasions there is no limit – in time or money – to the airline’s duty to look after its passengers, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled.
Denise McDonagh had a 7-day wait for a Faro-Dublin flight on Ryanair and said she spent nearly 1,130 euros on a hotel, food and transport.
Her compensation has not yet been paid.
Ryanair had argued the eruption of Iceland’s Eyjafjallajokull volcano was so extraordinary that normal rules should not apply.
But the judges’ ruling – now binding across the EU – said such events “constitute ‘extraordinary circumstances’ which do not release air carriers from their obligation to provide care”.
The EU regulation on passenger rights “does not provide for any limitation, either temporal or monetary, of the obligation to provide care to passengers whose flight is cancelled due to extraordinary circumstances”, the ECJ said.
Ryanair should have fully compensated a passenger whose flight was cancelled because of the volcanic ash cloud in 2010
“Thus, all the obligations to provide care to passengers are imposed on the air carrier for the whole period during which the passengers concerned must await their re-routing.”
Much of north Europe’s airspace was closed for more than a week in April 2010, as the volcano spewed dust into the atmosphere.
Aviation officials feared the dust could stop jet engines – an unacceptable hazard – and Denise McDonagh was among the thousands left stranded.
The ECJ ruling on Thursday said an Irish court must decide the amount of compensation to which Denise McDonagh is entitled. Her case had been referred to the ECJ by the Dublin Metropolitan District Court, which had sought clarification of EU law.
The passenger is entitled to “reimbursement of the amounts which proved necessary, appropriate and reasonable to make up for the shortcomings of the air carrier”, the ECJ said.
[youtube G0dSZapRH4U]
Employees who fall sick during their annual leave are entitled to take corresponding paid leave at a later date, the EU’s top court has ruled.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling is legally binding throughout the EU.
Thursday’s ruling was prompted by a Spanish trade union case against a group of department stores.
“The right to paid annual leave cannot be interpreted restrictively,” the court says.
The court in Luxembourg said the EU Working Time Directive grants workers a right to at least four weeks’ paid annual leave “even where such leave coincides with periods of sick leave”.
Employees who fall sick during their annual leave are entitled to take corresponding paid leave at a later date, the EU's top court has ruled
The ECJ says “the point at which the temporary incapacity arose is irrelevant”.
“Consequently, a worker is entitled to take paid annual leave, which coincides with a period of sick leave, at a later point in time, irrespective of the point at which the incapacity for work arose.”
According to an earlier ECJ ruling, workers who fall sick before a period of annual leave can also reschedule that leave period so that it does not clash with their sick leave.
At least 15 EU countries use the opt-out, which enables workers voluntarily to work more than 48 hours a week.
An EU source said the ECJ ruling has full, immediate effect EU-wide, regardless of the type or size of employer.
Workers who believe their employer has infringed their right to paid annual leave can seek justice in their national courts.
Infringement cases against employers who violate the directive can also be brought by the European Commission or national governments.
In cases where workers fall sick towards the end of the year, and are unable to take all of their annual leave, they can under EU law carry over their unused leave into the next accounting period.
The ECJ has also ruled that the long-term sick have the right to accumulate at least a year of unused annual leave. But the ECJ says the amount is not open-ended and member states can set an upper limit.