Eglītis ruling (C-294/10): burden of proof for reasonable measures

In Eglītis and Ratnieks (C-294/10, 12 May 2011), the Court of Justice explained what "all reasonable measures" means when an airline invokes extraordinary circumstances under article 5(3) of the Regulation. The airline must plan for the risk of delay and, where it can, operate the flight once the circumstances end, but the Court refused to impose a fixed minimum reserve time.

The rule in the Regulation

Under article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, an airline is not obliged to pay compensation for a cancellation if it can prove that the cancellation was caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. An external event alone is therefore not enough: the airline must also show the measures it took.

The question the Court answered

The Latvian court asked whether a carrier must organise its resources so that a scheduled flight can still operate after unforeseen circumstances have ended, during a certain period after the planned departure time.

What the Court decided

  • At the stage of organising the flight, the carrier must reasonably take account of the risk of delay and provide for a certain reserve time, so that it can, where possible, operate the whole flight once the circumstances have ended.
  • Article 5(3) cannot be read as requiring, as a reasonable measure, a minimum reserve time to be built in generally and without distinction.
  • The measures must be technically and economically viable for the carrier concerned. The national court assesses whether the carrier took measures appropriate to the situation.
  • Reasonableness is assessed by reference to the delay at the end of the flight operated in the new conditions, not to the original scheduled departure.

What this means for your claim

When an airline answers "weather", "air traffic control strike" or "volcanic ash", ask it to show:

  • what the extraordinary circumstance was and when it began;
  • what it did to avoid the delay or cancellation: reserve time, spare aircraft or crew, a different route, an earlier rebooking;
  • how long the delay was on arrival once the flight finally operated.

A general statement such as "the weather was bad" does not answer the question. See also McDonagh (volcanic ash), Pešková (bird strike) and extraordinary circumstances.

Hub: EC 261 CJEU case law

Sources

Related articles

Frequently Asked Questions

What does Eglītis establish?
An airline invoking extraordinary circumstances must prove it took all reasonable measures to avoid or limit the delay — the external event alone is insufficient.
What are reasonable measures?
Aircraft replacement, crew reassignment, rotation reorganisation — fact-specific. The burden of proof lies with the airline.
Link to Pešková?
Pešková confirms a bird strike may be extraordinary but the airline must still prove measures taken to limit delay.

Ready to claim your compensation?

File my claim in 2 min · Check my compensation · WhatsApp direct

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.