EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-629/10: Reference for a preliminary ruling from High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) made on 24 December 2010 — TUI Travel plc, British Airways plc, easyJet Airline Co. Ltd, International Air Transport Association, The Queen v Civil Aviation Authority

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62010CN0629

62010CN0629

December 24, 2010
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

19.3.2011

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/10

(Case C-629/10)

2011/C 89/18

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: TUI Travel plc, British Airways plc, easyJet Airline Co. Ltd, International Air Transport Association

Defendant: Civil Aviation Authority

Questions referred

1.Are Articles 5-7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) to be interpreted as requiring the compensation provided for in Article 7 to be paid to passengers whose flights are subject to delay within the meaning of Article 6, and if so in what circumstances?

2.If question 1 is answered in the negative, are Articles 5-7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 invalid, in whole or in part, for breach of the principle of equal treatment?

3.If question 1 is answered in the affirmative, are Articles 5-7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 invalid, in whole or in part, for (a) inconsistency with the Montreal Convention; (b) breach of the principle of proportionality; and/or (c) breach of the principle of legal certainty?

4.If question 1 is answered in the affirmative and question 3 in the negative, what if any limits are to be placed upon the temporal effects of the Court's ruling in this case?

5.If question 1 is answered in the negative, what if any effect is to be given to the decision of Sturgeon between 19 November 2009 and the date of the Court's ruling In this case?

(1) Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (Text with EEA relevance) — Commission Statement

OJ L 46, p. 1

* * *

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia