Official Journal of the European Union

EN

C series

—

C/2024/2411

8.4.2024

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy dla miasta stołecznego Warszawy w Warszawie (Poland) lodged on 12 January 2024 — M1.R. and M2.R. v AAA sp. z o.o.

(Case C-20/24, Cymdek) (1)

(C/2024/2411)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: M1.R. and M2.R.

Defendant: AAA sp. z o.o.

Questions referred

1.Must Article 2(g) 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, (2) be interpreted as meaning that a passenger’s boarding pass may constitute other proof, which indicates that the reservation has been accepted and registered by the air carrier or tour operator?

2.Must Article 3(2)(a) of [Regulation No 261/2004] be interpreted as meaning that passengers who have a boarding pass for a particular flight, where no special abnormal circumstance is demonstrated, should be considered to have a confirmed reservation on the flight concerned?

3.Must Article 3(3) of [Regulation No 261/2004] be interpreted as meaning that the passenger bears the burden of proving that the flight was paid for, or alternatively that the carrier, in order to be released from liability, has to prove that the passenger travelled free of charge or at a reduced fare?

4.Must Article 3(3) of [Regulation No 261/2004] be interpreted as meaning that where a passenger has purchased a package tour from a tour operator and the latter has paid the fare for the flight to the carrier, the flight has been paid for?

5.Must Article 3(3) of [Regulation No 261/2004] be interpreted as meaning that where a third party purchases a package tour on behalf of passengers, in connection with which the tour operator pays an arm’s-length remuneration to the charter carrier, this is not a case of ‘passengers travelling at a reduced fare’, irrespective of the terms of settlement between that third party and the passengers?

The present case has been given a fictitious name which does not correspond to the real names of any of the parties to the proceedings

OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1.

—

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2411/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—