- 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-51/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Pesti Központi Kerületi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 25 January 2022 — PannonHitel Pénzügyi Zrt. v WizzAir Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022CN0051
62022CN0051
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
19.4.2022
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 165/28
(Case C-51/22)
(2022/C 165/36)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: PannonHitel Pénzügyi Zrt.
Defendant: WizzAir Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.)
Question referred
Must Article 5(1)(a), the first indent of Article 8(1)(a) and Article 8(2) 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, (1) be interpreted as meaning that a passenger may exercise his or her right to reimbursement of the full cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought directly against the air carrier, even where the passenger has booked the ticket with the help of a third party acting as an intermediary, to whom the passenger paid the ticket price, and it was the intermediary who purchased the ticket from the air carrier and who paid [the carrier] the ticket price, and there is no indication that the intermediary was acting as the authorised agent of the air carrier or that it was a tour operator?
(1) OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1.