The likes of TUI/Jet2 will now be wishing they hadn’t bothered with the Canaries as they’ll now have to fly out empty for a week or two to bring people home...

Any thoughts as to what the major carriers at English or UK airports will do in the first couple of weeks of November ? Carry on flying to avoid EU261 claims or stop everything abruptly from Thurs 05 November and claim force majeure ?

It is not a restriction on airlines, it is a restriction on passengers travelling other than for essential work. I am guessing that airlines will carry on flying (with some flights consolidated) and passengers will be pointed in the direction of their travel insurers if they can’t travel.

So is there anything different between the latest lock down and the last lock down when most airports all but closed? Even Wizz at Luton shut down as one point and operated just 3 flights a day at other times but I think that was because European borders were also closed. This time it might be different allowing for rule breaches.
Once again people have been caught out. No doubt the likes of Ryanair will fly out empty aircraft and keep the money.

Right so he posts on Youtube for an innate love of self publicity.............. oh wait he sells books as well.

Not an immunologist, not a specialist in infectious viruses but he used to teach nurses, not dissing his teaching career BUT his speciality is NOT viruses.

After watching one of his youtube spiels a lot of recent postings make sense, suggest turning him off for your personal well being.

A govt decision to prevent people flying is not the fault of an airline, therefore EU261 I believe will not apply. No doubt there will be some who sue on that basis but Govt bans are not the fault of an airline. If CAA claims EU261 applies then likely will end up in court.

This definition will depend on a Judge as they likely will view it differently. I doubt a Govt will want a judge to examine the whole legality behind making a decision like this. A single misstep will pretty much make their decision null and void will them likely to be sued by business for other losses.

Preventing people flying has a whole host of concerns on individual rights, if people wish to fly then let them, just impose conditions on them when they return like 14 day isolation paid for by them. This then stops being a "prevention of flying" issue but a public health issue on their return.

He follows the science and provides the links to the verifiable reports. It is a shame that all you can do is insult him but then he is not an expert like you.

I hope you will follow his advice and take your Vitamin D to improve our chances of reading your posts next year seeing you won’t be taking a vaccine.

No foreign holidays or trips to second homes.

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel...-b1482052.html

There are 4 reasons why some flights might operate

1) To operate repatriation flights for those coming to the end of their holidays
2) To provide some service for those travelling on essential business
3) Foreign carriers who have already sold seats in their home market
4) Those airlines (and I’m thinking Ryanair) who will insist on operating flights to avoid paying compensation

Do they need to pay compensation though? It’s not the fault of the airlines. Or do you mean refunds?

What about people that don't live in England that are flying from an English Airport?
Prime example, many Welsh use Bristol.
When local lockdown was in place in Wales, CWL was still open for those counties not in lockdown and anyone in England to use, despite its local authority where CWL is being in lockdown. Citing people can use the Airport if they are not in lockdown provided travel to the Airport is direct.

Maybe that will change after the Welsh lockdown is finished but then anyone from Wales would then fall under a English law when they cross the border.

This 4 nation approach shows the perils of devolved power. You just need to look at Spain to see how it doesn’t work particularly with their Covid response

I'm amazed it took Wizz until 1st May to work out that it was cheaper to operate empty planes and not pay out refunds than actually doing so.

Why did Easyjet not follow the same path or are they the good guys?

All that happened yesterday was the announcement of a set of proposed measures that will be debated, and voted on, in Parliament on Wednesday.

Clearly some of the devilish detail is still being worked on, so it's to be expected that a number of aspects aren't entirely clear yet.

This is correct, but the intention is clear.

Same for us in north wales, our “local” airports are Liverpool and Manchester. I am due to fly with KLM from MAN to France via AMS on 9th November because my current job is based there so have to return, at the moment I am on furlough so have come to the UK to see my family whilst in quarantine. Do I change my flight to before 5th or wait and hope KLM still operate my flights...

You are quite happy to follow whatever Vodoo science and retired teacher spouting whatever they want on youtube.

I notice you seem to want to make continuous personal attacks on people who refuse to agree to your version of events. That is sad.

If a Govt refuses to allow you operate flights then said Govt cannot insist you pay compensation because of its actions. They can try it on but ultimately it will fail in court.