- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-411/23, D. (Engine design defect): Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 13 June 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Okręgowy w Warszawie – Poland) – D. S.A. v P. S.A. (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Air transport – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Article 5(3) – Compensation for passengers in the event of long delay or cancellation of flights – Exemption from the obligation to pay compensation – Extraordinary circumstances – Reasonable preventive measures – Technical failures caused by a hidden design defect – Design defect affecting an aircraft engine – Obligation of the air carrier to have back-up aircraft)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CA0411
62023CA0411
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C series
—
C/2024/4569
29.7.2024
(Case C-411/23,
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Air transport - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Article 5(3) - Compensation for passengers in the event of long delay or cancellation of flights - Exemption from the obligation to pay compensation - Extraordinary circumstances - Reasonable preventive measures - Technical failures caused by a hidden design defect - Design defect affecting an aircraft engine - Obligation of the air carrier to have back-up aircraft)
(C/2024/4569)
Language of the case: Polish
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: D. S.A.
Defendant: P. S.A.
Operative part of the judgment
1.Article 5(3) of 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, must be interpreted as meaning that the detection of a hidden defect in the design of the engine of an aircraft which is to operate a flight is covered by the concept of ‘extraordinary circumstances’ within the meaning of that provision, even where the engine manufacturer had informed the air carrier of the existence of a defect of that kind several months before the flight concerned.
2.Article 5(3) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that an air carrier may, as part of ‘all [the] reasonable measures’ which it is required to take in order to prevent the occurrence and the consequences of an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ within the meaning of that provision, such as the detection of a hidden defect in the design of the engine of one of its aircraft, adopt a preventive measure consisting of having a back-up fleet of aircraft on standby, provided that that measure is technically and economically feasible in the light of the carrier’s capacities at the relevant time.
* Language of the case: English.
OJ C C/2023/43.
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4569/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—