header-logo header-logo

Jet2.com could cost £bns

05 November 2014
Issue: 7629 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The Supreme Court has scotched travel industry hopes of avoiding a huge payout over flight delays.

The court refused applications by Jet2.com and Thomson to appeal earlier decisions that found them liable to pay compensation (Jet2.com Ltd v Huzar [2014] EWCA Civ 791 and Thomson Airways Ltd v Dawson [2014] EWCA Civ 845).

The result could cost the airlines billions of pounds, according to David Bott, senior partner at Bott & Co, which acted for the Jet2.com passengers. He said an estimated 2.36 million passengers per year in England and Wales could benefit from Jet2.com, equivalent to about £876m in compensation, while Thomson had opened up an estimated £3.89bn in historic flight compensation.

Jet2.com stemmed from a 27-hour delay on a flight from Malaga to Manchester in 2011. Thomson resulted from a six and a half hour delay on Christmas Day 2006 at Gatwick Airport.

Bott, whose firm has thousands of clients with claims on hold, said: “The Supreme Court’s decision has provided total clarity in the law, which will benefit both airlines and passengers going forward.”

In Jet2.com the Court of Appeal held that an unforeseeable technical problem (a wiring defect) did not amount to “extraordinary circumstances” for the purposes of Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004. Thomson centred on the issue of whether the relevant limitation period was two years or six years. The Court of Appeal held six years.

A Thomson Airways spokesperson says: “We are surprised and disappointed to note the decision of the Supreme Court as we believe our position is sound in law.”

Issue: 7629 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll