Eglītis ruling (C-294/10): burden of proof for reasonable measures
The Eglītis v Latvijas Republikas ekonomikas ministrija ruling (CJEU, 12 May 2010, C-294/10) is foundational: it clarifies the burden of proof when an airline invokes Article 5(3) (extraordinary circumstances).
The decision
An external event (ATC strike, weather…) alone does not exempt the airline. It must demonstrate that it took all reasonable measures to avoid or minimise the cancellation or delay.
Practical impact
Challenge refusals citing "weather" or "ATC strike" by requesting evidence of measures taken. See our CJEU case law hub.
Related articles
Frequently Asked Questions
What does Eglītis establish?
What are reasonable measures?
Link to Pešková?
Ready to claim your compensation?
Article written and verified by the Robin des Airs team (robindesairs.eu) — specialists in EC 261 flight compensation on the Europe-Africa axis. Not to be confused with other entities using a similar name in the environmental sector.
General information. This article provides an educational summary of the regulations in force (Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, Montreal Convention, CJEU case law) at the date of publication. It does not constitute personalized legal advice or an attorney consultation. To assess your individual situation, contact Robin des Airs (representation mandate) or a lawyer specialized in aviation law. The amounts, deadlines and examples mentioned are indicative and may evolve according to court decisions and regulatory updates.