In case of a cancelled flight and a stay of one or more nights the air carrier shall be bound to offer free hotel accommodation to the passengers concerned. Is the air carrier liable for the accommodation itself provided by the hotel?
The Court of the European Union (“the Court”) in its judgment dated September 2020 studied the limitation of the air carrier’s responsibility. The Court reviewed a case where an accommodated passenger suffered damages caused by negligence by employees of the hotel.
The problem enters into the scope of application Regulation 261/2004 (“the Regulation”).
- The particular case
- A flight from Mallorca (Spain) to Vienna (Austria) is cancelled. The booking of a passenger in the context of a package travel contract is scheduled for the next day.
- The air carrier offers free hotel accommodation to the passenger.
- The passenger is confined to a wheelchair. During his stay in the hotel the passenger falls and is seriously injured because the front wheels of the wheelchair get caught in a transverse gutter channel in a pathway.
- The accident happens on the territory of the hotel as a result of negligence of employees of the hotel. The passenger brings an action against the air carrier before the competent national court for compensation of the damages.
- The national courts at two instances rule controversially whether the air carrier shall be deemed liable for the negligence of employees of the hotel.
- The dispute is brought before the Supreme Court which stops the proceedings and refers to the Court with questions.
- The questions to the Court and its answers
2.1 Is the obligation of the air carrier is limited to providing the passengers with a hotel and covering the costs of the accommodation? Or is the air carrier also liable for the accommodation as such?
The answer of the Court:
The of the air carrier under the Regulation in case of a cancelled flight to offer free hotel accommodation does not mean that the air carrier is required to take care of the accommodation arrangements as such.
The considerations of the Court:
- That obligation of the air carrier has as purpose to prevent a situation where passengers with cancelled flight look for a hotel themselves and cover the costs for the accommodation.
- The Regulation does not impose on air carriers the obligation to organize the actual implementation of the accommodation.
- The end of the Regulation is aimed at granting the passengers with cancelled flight a scheme for standardized and immediate on-the-spot assistance. The assignment to the air carrier to take care of the accommodation conditions would exceed the scope of such a scheme.
- Despite the above, the air carrier shall offer an adequate care. The air carrier must select the hotel carefully, having ascertained that the hotel is capable of meeting reasonable expectations for quality and safety. In cases of people with reduced mobility the air carrier should have checked that the hotel is adequately equipped.
- The liability of the air carrier might be subject to a broader interpretation, but the Regulation provides is more limited – the Regulation implements a scheme for standardized and immediate assistance.
2.2 Is the air carrier, which in case of a cancelled flight provided free hotel accommodation, liable for damages caused to the passengers by employees of the hotel?
The answer of the Court:
The Regulation alone does not require from the air carrier, which offered free hotel accommodation to passengers with cancelled flight, to compensate the passengers for the damages caused to them by employees of the hotel.
The considerations of the Court:
- Taking care for the conditions of the accommodation does not enter the scope of the due care of the air carrier for providing of accommodation in a hotel of the passengers with a cancelled flight.
- If the air carrier fails to fulfil the obligation to provide accommodation, the passengers are entitled to a compensation. The compensation will cover the amounts which prove necessary, appropriate and reasonable to make up for the shortcomings of the air carrier in the provision of care.
- The right to a reimbursement of these amounts are fully in compliance with the logic of the scheme for standardized and immediate measures in favour of the passengers under the Regulation. These amounts are intended to compensate the costs made by the passengers for obtaining the same standardized and immediate services as those which the air carrier should have offered them. It would not be necessary for that purpose a case-by-case assessment of the specific circumstances of each passenger to be carried out.
- The compensation of individual damages however, caused by employees of the hotel, selected by the air carrier, would lead to case-by-case assessment of the amount of the stated damages. That would exceed the scope of the standardized and immediate measures under the Regulation.
- According to the Court’s case-law, the Regulation does not provide compensation of individual damages, the remedy of which damages inevitably requires case-by-case assessment of the caused damages.