Article 1, Subject matter and regime of the assignment This instrument is a PURE AND SIMPLE ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIM AGREEMENT (articles 1321 et seq. of the Civil Code). The Assignor (the passenger) assigns to Robin des Airs (the Assignee), which acquires in its own name and on its own behalf, its claim, existing or future, under Regulation (CE) n° 261/2004: fixed-rate compensation (art. 7), reimbursements and care (art. 8 and 9) and, where applicable, additional damages (art. 12), arising from the delay, cancellation or denied boarding that is the subject of this instrument (the "Incident").

Transfer of ownership and risk. The assignment operates a full transfer of the claim to the Assignee: as from signature, Robin des Airs is its sole owner, exercises it in its own name, alone bears the uncertainty of recovery and bears, with no recourse against the Assignor, all costs incurred (lawyer, bailiff, court registry, platform). The Assignor bears no cost and cannot be called upon to guarantee against failure.

Assignment price. The assignment price is variable and contingent (articles 1108 and 1964 of the Civil Code), indexed on the amount actually received by the Assignee: it is defined in Article 4. The Assignor expressly accepts this contingent nature: if no sum is recovered, the price is nil and the Assignor can claim no sum.

Transparency on the risk and informed assessment by the Assignor. The Assignor expressly declares having received, prior to signature, the information enabling it to assess for itself the risk of recovery, in particular: (i) the flight distance and the fixed CE 261/2004 amount potentially due; (ii) the Assignee's historical average recovery rate for the airline concerned ("airline matrix", made available on simple request and published at robindesairs.eu/transparence); (iii) the known main causes of failure (insolvency, limitation, extraordinary circumstances, non-EU jurisdiction); (iv) the average duration of proceedings (12 to 24 months). The Assignor acknowledges having had the time necessary for this assessment and not having committed under pressure. This sincere and complete information excludes any defect of consent, lesion or lack of cause within the meaning of article 1131 of the Civil Code.

Disputed claim — transfer of risk (no litigious redemption). The assigned claim is uncertain and disputed: its existence and its amount are liable to be contested by the debtor (the air carrier). This uncertain nature underpins the variable and contingent price (Article 4) and the full transfer of the risk to the Assignee. However, since no lawsuit is pending on the date of the assignment and no challenge on the merits of the right has been raised before a court, the claim is not litigious within the meaning of articles 1699 and 1700 of the Civil Code: the assigned debtor carrier has no right of litigious redemption (Article 5 bis).

Economic reality of the transfer (rejection of reclassification as a mandate). The classification as an assignment — and not a mandate — rests on the economic reality of the transaction, the only criterion sovereignly applied by the court: (i) the Assignee acts in its own name and on its own behalf, and not in the name of the Assignor; (ii) it bears alone and without recourse all the risk and the costs (Articles 4 and 5 bis), the Assignor never being able to be called upon to guarantee against failure or held to any advance; (iii) the assignment is notified to the assigned debtor (Articles 1 bis and 6), which a recovery mandate does not entail; (iv) the Assignor loses control of the case (no-instruction clause, Article 1 bis). These elements characterise a genuine transfer of ownership of the claim and exclude the classification as a mandate.

Connections. Where the journey includes one or more connections under a single booking, the assignment covers the entire journey: the compensation is determined by the final destination and the total distance, the delay being assessed on arrival at the final destination (CJEU, 26 February 2013, Folkerts, C-11/11).

Case email address. Robin des Airs creates a dedicated technical email address (the case reference followed by " @robindesairs.eu " , e.g.: ref@robindesairs.eu) constituting the reference address for all exchanges with the airline, its representatives and any third party; Robin des Airs alone administers it. The Assignor expressly authorises its creation and its use for the duration of the agreement, including for formal notices and procedural acts, and retains the access, copies and documents in order to ensure the traceability of the case. Operational follow-up with the Assignor may be carried out via WhatsApp or any other agreed channel, on a non-exclusive basis.

Language. This agreement is a bilingual instrument drawn up in French and English, the French version being the only authoritative one. The Assignor authorises Robin des Airs to draw up, produce and rely on the English version (or a faithful translation) against the airline and any third party. In the event of any discrepancy, the signed French original prevails. The signature covers the instrument in both its languages.

Article 1 bis, Notification of the assignment and independence of action Immediate effect. The assignment takes effect between the parties as from signature (art. 1321 C. civ.). The Assignee is, as from that date, the sole holder of the claim and acts exclusively in its own name and on its own behalf at all stages (claim, formal notice, any mediation, judicial proceedings), without representing the Assignor.

Immediate notification to the carrier. The assignment is notified to the carrier (assigned debtor) as of the first formal act of recovery (official claim or formal notice sent by the Assignee or its lawyer), in accordance with article 1324 of the Civil Code. As from this notification, only payment made into the hands of the Assignee discharges the debt.

No-instruction clause. As the claim is the property of the Assignee, the Assignor may give no instruction to the Assignee as to the choice of court, the procedural strategy, the appropriateness or terms of a settlement, or the timing of the filing of the legal action. The Assignee conducts the case alone in its own economic interest and freely assesses the viability of cases before initiating judicial proceedings. The Assignor is kept informed of the key stages as a courtesy, without such information constituting a consultation or a mandate.

Representation in court by a lawyer. The Assignee carries out no activity reserved to lawyers and never appears alone before a court. Any judicial proceedings are necessarily conducted by a lawyer admitted to a bar, instructed by the Assignee at its exclusive expense, who alone ensures representation and pleading.

Article 5 bis, Terms of the assignment, absence of litigious redemption and reassignment Subject matter and scope of the assignment. The Assignor fully and definitively assigns to Robin des Airs the compensation claim, existing or future, that it holds against the operating air carrier that carried out the flight (art. 2 b) of the Regulation), whatever the commercial flight number or the marketing airline (codeshare), under Regulation (CE) n° 261/2004 for the Incident, including the fixed-rate compensation (art. 7), the reimbursements and expenses (art. 8 and 9), the additional damages (art. 12), interest, penalties and ancillary sums. The claim of a minor passenger is not included in the assignment: it is the subject of the special collection mandate provided for in Article 9 bis.

Effect between the parties. In accordance with articles 1321 to 1326 of the Civil Code, the assignment takes effect between the parties as from signature and relates to a determinable claim (parties, flight, date, CE 261/2004 basis). The Assignee becomes the sole holder of the claim and exercises it in its own name.

Enforceability against the carrier (immediate). The assignment becomes enforceable against the carrier (assigned debtor) within the meaning of article 1324 of the Civil Code as of the first formal act of recovery sent to the carrier by the Assignee or its lawyer (official claim or formal notice), which constitutes notification of the assignment. As from this notification, only payment made into the hands of the Assignee discharges the debt, and the Assignee acts in recovery in its own name and on its own behalf, by any amicable, administrative, judicial or arbitral means.

Absence of litigious right and of redemption (art. 1699 and 1700 C. civ.). Under the terms of article 1700 of the Civil Code, a thing is litigious only "as soon as there is a lawsuit and a challenge on the merits of the right". On the date of signature, no proceedings are pending regarding the assigned claim and no challenge on the merits has been raised before a court: the claim, simply uncertain and disputed, is not litigious within the meaning of these provisions and the assigned debtor carrier may exercise no litigious redemption (art. 1699 C. civ.). The classification as an assignment — and not a mandate — results from the economic reality of the transaction (Article 1: action in its own name, full transfer of the risk and costs, notification to the debtor, no-instruction clause), and not from a formal label.

Actual price of the assignment — subsidiary stipulation (for the sole case where a litigious redemption were nevertheless held admissible). For the avoidance of doubt, if a court were to hold, contrary to the foregoing analysis, a litigious redemption admissible, the parties agree conclusively between them that the "actual price of the assignment" is set at a flat rate at the following amount, corresponding to the economic value the parties assigned to the claim at signature:

• 75 % of the fixed CE 261/2004 amount applicable to the flight (250 €, 400 € or 600 € depending on distance), per assigning passenger;
• increased by the justified costs and legitimate expenses incurred by the Assignee (lawyer, bailiff, court registry, judicial platform fees);
• and by interest at the statutory rate as from signature.

This flat-rate determination precludes any setting of the price at a lower amount, in particular by reason of the variable nature of the assignment price (Article 4): the contingent nature of the price governs the Assignor-Assignee relationship and is not enforceable against the assigned debtor exercising the litigious redemption. Any contrary setting would be unenforceable against the Assignor and the Assignee.

Warranty of accuracy and reassignment. The Assignor warrants the accuracy of the declared information (identity, confirmed booking, flight and date concerned) and, if the claim already exists at signature, its existence; if the claim is future (disruption ongoing at signature), it does not warrant the occurrence of the event giving rise to compensation (final arrival delayed by 3 hours or more), this risk being fully transferred to the Assignee. It declares that the claim has been the subject of no prior assignment, settlement or payment. The Assignor warrants neither the solvency of the debtor nor the outcome of the recovery, the risk of which is fully transferred to the Assignee (Article 1). Upon termination of the agreement without recovery, in the event of closure for irrecoverability (Article 7 quater), or in the event of withdrawal within the time limit of Article 9, the claim is reassigned by operation of law to the Assignor, free of charge and without indemnity on either side.

Article 5 ter, Validity of the assignment and unenforceability of non-assignability clauses Validity of the assignment and standing of the Assignee (CJEU, 9 October 2025, Lufthansa v AirHelp, C-551/24). The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that the assignment of a compensation claim under Regulation (CE) n° 261/2004 is perfectly lawful and that the assignment has no effect as such on the determination of the competent court: the assignee may rely on the same grounds of jurisdiction as the assignor, and in particular article 7§1 of the Brussels I bis Regulation (place of provision of the service = airport of departure or arrival of the flight, CJEU Rehder C-204/08).

Unenforceability of non-assignability clauses (CJEU, 6 February 2025, Eventmedia v Air Europa, C-11/23). The Assignor declares that it is aware of the airline's general conditions of carriage. Any clause of the general conditions of carriage prohibiting or restricting the assignment of the compensation claim due under Regulation (CE) n° 261/2004 is unenforceable, as being contrary to article 15 of the Regulation (CJEU, 6 February 2025, Eventmedia Soluciones v Air Europa Líneas Aéreas, C-11/23). Consequently, the airline may not rely on such a clause against the assignment granted to Robin des Airs (Articles 1 and 5 bis).

Article 5 quater, Unenforceability of restrictive procedural clauses against the assignee The Assignee, acting in its own name as the holder of the assigned claim (Article 1), is not bound by the clauses of the general conditions of carriage that (i) would make the admissibility of a claim under Regulation (CE) n° 261/2004 subject to a prior waiting period, (ii) would restrict the passenger's right to be represented, (iii) would limit the assignment of the claim, (iv) would require that a claim emanate personally from the passenger prior to any step by a third party or an assignee, or (v) would require that payment be made exclusively into the hands of the passenger notwithstanding the notified assignment. These clauses are unenforceable in view of the mandatory nature of the Regulation (article 15) and, as regards the clauses limiting assignability, of the case law CJEU, 6 February 2025, Eventmedia Soluciones v Air Europa, C-11/23.

Jurisdiction clauses (CJEU, 18 November 2020, Ryanair v DelayFix, C-519/19). A jurisdiction clause inserted in the contract of carriage concluded between the passenger and the airline is not enforceable against the Assignee, a third party to that contract, which did not consent to it; such a clause, not individually negotiated, is moreover liable to be declared unfair. The Assignee therefore freely brings its action before the courts designated in Article 11.

Article 9, Right of withdrawal (14 days) & Immediate start In accordance with articles L. 221-18 et seq. of the Consumer Code, the Assignor has a withdrawal period of 14 calendar days as from signature, without having to give a reason and free of charge. It may exercise this right by any unambiguous statement, for example by email to contact@robindesairs.eu with the wording "I withdraw, Ref. [case number]", or via the model form below.

In accordance with article L. 221-25 of the Consumer Code, the Assignor may expressly request immediate performance of the agreement before the expiry of the 14-day period, by ticking the optional box provided at validation; Robin des Airs is then authorised to begin the steps without waiting. Failing such a request, the steps begin only upon expiry of the 14-day withdrawal period. In any event, in the event of withdrawal within this period, and in accordance with the "No Win No Fee" principle, no sum is due from the Assignor, including for the steps already taken; the claim is reassigned to it by operation of law.

Interaction with the notification to the carrier (withdrawal after notification of the assignment). If the Assignor exercises its right of withdrawal after the Assignee has notified the assignment to the carrier (Article 1 bis), the Assignee:

• notifies the carrier without delay, by registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt, of the withdrawal and the reassignment of the claim to the Assignor;
• until receipt of this notification by the carrier, any payment made into the hands of the Assignee remains discharging; the Assignee pays over to the Assignor in full any sum thus received, without deduction of any commission or fees;
• as from receipt of this notification by the carrier, the latter is required to pay directly to the Assignor, who has again become the holder of the claim.

The Assignor is informed that this notification to the carrier is made at the initiative and expense of the Assignee, without recourse against it, in order to guarantee the enforceability of the reassignment.

Article 10 bis, Electronic formation, evidence and certain date Formation of the agreement at a distance. This agreement is concluded electronically under the conditions of articles 1125 to 1127-2 of the Civil Code: the Assignor had access to all the provisions before signing, was able to check the details of its commitment and correct any errors, then confirmed its acceptance. In accordance with article L. 221-13 of the Consumer Code, the confirmation of the concluded agreement, comprising all its provisions and the information on the right of withdrawal (Article 9), is provided to the Assignor on a durable medium (email with the signed agreement attached) immediately after signature.

Electronic signature and evidence agreement (art. 1366 to 1368 C. civ.; art. 25 of the eIDAS Regulation n° 910/2014). The agreement is signed by means of an electronic signature whose legal effect and admissibility as evidence may not be denied solely on the ground of its electronic form (art. 25 eIDAS). The process, operated via a trust service provider (Yousign), combines: a personal and confidential signature link sent to the signatory's email address (receipt, consultation and activation logged), the timestamp of each step, an integrity seal of the signed document (cryptographic fingerprint) and an evidence file drawn up by the provider (transmission of the link, consultation, signature, IP address fingerprint, device). The parties agree, as an evidence agreement, that this evidence file constitutes proof between them of the identity of the signatories, the integrity of the document, the consent and its date, unless proven otherwise. Robin des Airs may, in addition, use an advanced signature provider (art. 26 eIDAS), without this conditioning the validity of this agreement. The electronic writing thus established has the same evidential value as a writing on paper (art. 1366 C. civ.) and any copy derived from it constitutes a reliable copy (art. 1379 C. civ.).

Certain date and precedence of the assignment. The timestamp of the evidence file, corroborated by the SHA-256 fingerprint of the document, establishes that the assignment precedes any act of recovery, any formal notice and any proceedings initiated by the Assignee. The Assignee retains the evidence file for the entire duration of the agreement and the applicable limitation periods, and may produce it in court to justify its standing to act and the date of the assignment.