Extraordinary Circumstances: What Kills a Flight Compensation Claim

The two-part test the airline must pass

An airline escapes compensation only if it proves two things. First, that the disruption was caused by extraordinary circumstances — events that are not part of running an airline and that the airline could not control. Second, that it took all reasonable measures to avoid the disruption anyway. Both parts must hold. One without the other is not enough.

That second part trips airlines up. Even a genuine storm does not excuse a carrier that had no spare aircraft, no rebooking plan, and no slack in its schedule. If a reasonable airline could have got you there with less delay, the excuse collapses and you are owed the money.

What usually counts as extraordinary

Courts have accepted that some events really are outside an airline's control. The usual list:

Even on this list, nothing is automatic. The airline still has to show that the event actually caused your specific delay and that it responded properly. A storm that hit a different airport, hours earlier, on a different aircraft's route, is not your storm.

• Severe weather that closes airports or makes flying unsafe — though routine bad weather on an ordinary day is argued case by case
• Air-traffic-control strikes, restrictions, and airspace closures
• Security risks, such as a bomb threat or an unruly passenger forcing a diversion
• Political instability or conflict on the route
• Bird strikes — confirmed as extraordinary in Pešková (C-315/15)
• Hidden manufacturing defects revealed by the manufacturer or a safety authority

What is not extraordinary — whatever the rejection email says

The EU court has been strict here. In Wallentin-Hermann (C-549/07), it ruled that technical problems revealed during aircraft maintenance are inherent in running an airline, not extraordinary. Van der Lans (C-257/14) pushed further: even a spontaneous, unexpected component failure is the airline's problem, because wear and tear comes with the job.

The same logic covers people and planning. Crew sickness or crew shortage is a staffing issue that any business must prepare for. And the classic 'late incoming aircraft' excuse — your plane arriving late from its previous trip — is a knock-on delay the airline could have planned around with buffers or spare capacity. None of these qualify on their own.

Strikes by the airline's own staff: the excuse that already lost in court

This deserves its own section, because airlines still wrongly reject these claims. In Airhelp v SAS (C-28/20), decided in 2021, the EU court ruled that a strike by the airline's own pilots — organised by unions during pay negotiations — is not an extraordinary circumstance. Labour disputes are part of running any business, and the airline can influence them at the negotiating table.

Earlier, in Krüsemann (C-195/17), the court reached the same result for a wildcat strike, where TUIfly staff called in sick en masse after a restructuring announcement. The dividing line is who employs the strikers. A walkout by the airline's own pilots, cabin crew, or engineers is not extraordinary. A strike by air-traffic controllers or airport workers the airline does not employ can be.

If your rejection email blames 'industrial action' without saying whose, ask. Airlines lean on vague wording precisely because most passengers have never heard of the SAS ruling. In 2026 this is still one of the most common wrongful rejections we see.

The burden of proof is on the airline — not you

You do not have to prove the weather was fine or the aircraft was badly maintained. The regulation puts the burden of proof on the carrier. If it claims extraordinary circumstances, it must back that up with evidence: weather reports for your route and time, air-traffic-control notices, technical logs.

So push back. Reply and ask for the specific evidence behind the rejection. Many airlines fold at this point, because the file does not support the excuse. If they still refuse, a national enforcement body, an ADR scheme, or a court can force the documents out.

You still get care — even in a genuine storm

Extraordinary circumstances cancel compensation, but they never cancel care. Article 9 applies whatever the cause: meals and drinks during the wait, two free communications, and a hotel with transfers if you are stranded overnight.

The EU court confirmed this in McDonagh v Ryanair (C-12/11), a case from the 2010 volcanic ash cloud that grounded Europe for days. Even in an event that extreme, the airline still had to look after its passengers. If you paid for food or a room yourself, claim those receipts back — that claim works even when compensation does not.

Not sure? Check anyway — it costs nothing

Plenty of valid claims die because the passenger took the rejection email at face value. Checking costs nothing: you can write to the airline yourself and demand its evidence, and FlightPayout will assess your flight for free with no commitment.

If the case turns into a fight, claim-management companies charge roughly 25–35% of the payout on success and nothing on failure. Handing over a quarter of your money stings, but it can make sense when the airline ignores letters, refuses to share evidence, or will only pay when sued. For everything else, the free direct route comes first.