Originally Posted by
RevMan2
If an unusually high concentration of volcanic ash in the atmosphere that prevents flying( Eyjafjallajökull, 2010) is NOT an Act of god (as per the ECJ) and thus the airlines' (insurable) risk, doesn't Nemo 2013 (an unusually high concentration of ice crystals in the atmosphere that prevents flying) fall into the same category?
Weather delays ARE considered to be an exceptional circumstance and COMPENSATION for delay/cancellation are not payable. However there is no waiving of the duty for care FOR ANY REASON, including Nemo. EU airlines must provide care for (almost) all of their flights. The only exception being sectors between two non EU airports (Virgin, for example, between SYD and HKG).
Sorry for shouting, it's bad form, but we need to be clear - this ruling is about the duty for care contained in Regulation 261, not about cash compensation.