Krijgsman ruling (C-302/16): proving 14-day cancellation notice

By the Robin des Airs team · Published on January 15, 2026 · Updated on October 24, 2026

In Krijgsman v Surinaamse Luchtvaart Maatschappij (C-302/16, 11 May 2017), the Court of Justice ruled that an airline must pay compensation when the passenger was not told of a cancellation at least two weeks before departure, even if the airline had informed the travel agent in time, unless the agent passed the information on within that period. The airline carries the burden of proving whether and when the passenger was informed. This is not the Krüsemann strike ruling (C-195/17).

The facts

Mr Krijgsman booked a return flight through the online agency Gate1. The flight was operated by Surinaamse Luchtvaart Maatschappij (SLM). On 9 October 2014, SLM informed the agency that the flight was cancelled. SLM then rejected his compensation claim, arguing that the change had been communicated to the agency in time.

What the Court decided

The operating carrier must pay compensation if the passenger was not informed of the cancellation at least two weeks before the scheduled departure.
That remains true even where the carrier told the travel agent, through whom the contract of carriage was made, in time, if the agent did not pass the information on to the passenger within that period.
The burden of proof on whether and when the passenger was informed rests on the operating carrier.

The 14-day rule in the Regulation

Under article 5(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, a passenger is not entitled to the article 7 compensation if they were informed at least two weeks before departure. If they were informed between 7 and 14 days before, the carrier avoids paying only if it offered re-routing that leaves no more than 2 hours before the original departure and arrives less than 4 hours after the original arrival. If they were informed less than 7 days before, the re-routing must leave no more than 1 hour before and arrive less than 2 hours after.

What this means for your claim

If you bought your ticket through an agency or online platform, what counts is the date you were informed, not the date the airline wrote to the agency.

Keep the date and time of every email, SMS or app notification, and screenshots of them.
If the airline says it told the agency on a given date, ask it to prove that the agency passed the message on to you before the 14-day mark.
If you find the information only when you check the booking, note the date you first saw it.

Limits of the ruling

Krijgsman only deals with proof of notice. It does not decide whether the cancellation was caused by an extraordinary circumstance, which is a separate defence (see extraordinary circumstances), and it does not say that compensation is automatic: the flight must also fall within the scope of the Regulation.

Hub: EC 261 CJEU case law · Cancelled flight compensation · Krüsemann (internal strike)

Sources

Frequently Asked Questions

Krijgsman or Krüsemann?

Krijgsman (C-302/16, 2017) concerns proof of pre-cancellation notice (14 days). Krüsemann (C-195/17, 2018) concerns internal strikes — different rulings.

What must the airline prove?

That it informed the passenger at least 14 days before scheduled departure, or that cancellation resulted from extraordinary circumstances.

Passenger takeaway?

If the airline cannot prove timely notice, Article 7 compensation is due.

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.