Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 allows an airline to avoid paying compensation in the event of "extraordinary circumstances". But the situation must genuinely qualify: the Court of Justice of the European Union has laid down precise rules, often little known even to the airlines themselves.
✓ Content checked by the VolClaim editorial team · Last updated: 19 October 2026 · Sources: Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, CJEU case law
Storm, dense fog, volcanic eruption (the Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull in 2010): these events are beyond the airline's control.
Strike by air traffic controllers or airport staff (not employed by the airline): an external event that the airline cannot control.
The CJEU has held that a collision between an aircraft and a bird constitutes an extraordinary circumstance (case C-315/15, Court of Justice of the European Union, 2018).
A proven terrorist threat, airspace closure for security reasons, political instability in the area overflown or at the destination.
A technical problem linked to normal maintenance or to the premature failure of a part is part of the normal exercise of an airline's activity (Wallentin-Hermann C-549/07 and van der Lans C-257/14 judgments).
A strike, even a spontaneous one, by staff employed by the airline itself has been held not to be extraordinary, because it is linked to the company's internal labour relations (TUIfly judgment, C-195/17; SAS judgment, C-28/20).
An unavailable crew or poor rotation planning is part of the airline's normal management, not an external event.
Denied boarding due to overbooking results from a commercial decision by the airline: it always gives a right to compensation (Article 4).
An extraordinary circumstance alone is not enough to exempt the airline. It must also prove:
1. The causal link: that this circumstance is indeed the direct cause of the delay or cancellation of your specific flight, and not of another flight in the rotation.
2. Reasonable measures: that it took all the reasonable measures available to it to prevent the circumstance from causing the delay or cancellation (for example, finding a replacement aircraft or crew).
In practice, many airlines invoke "extraordinary circumstances" far too broadly. It is up to them to prove it, claim by claim — not up to the passenger to justify themselves.
Generally not. The Court of Justice of the European Union (Wallentin-Hermann judgment, C-549/07) considers that a technical fault linked to the normal maintenance of an aircraft is part of the normal exercise of the airline's activity and does not exempt it.
It depends on who is striking. An external strike (air traffic controllers, airport staff) is generally extraordinary. A strike by the airline's own staff, even an unexpected one, has been held not to be extraordinary by the CJEU (TUIfly judgment, C-195/17).
It is up to the airline to prove that it faced an extraordinary circumstance and that it took all reasonable measures to avoid it. The passenger does not have to prove anything.
If the airline invokes an "extraordinary circumstance" on a claim you have entrusted to us, we check whether this reason is justified and challenge it if it is not. No upfront costs: 25% incl. VAT only if successful. If court action becomes necessary, our total fee is capped at 50% incl. VAT. It covers all procedural costs (court fees, lawyer, judicial officer), which we advance and bear. If the proceedings fail, you pay nothing. Procedural costs awarded against the airline (legal costs, Article 700 of the French Code of Civil Procedure) are retained by us.
Check my eligibility