Stranded passengers. This decision could be very far reaching
 

I can see their point. An open-ended liability could wipe out some airlines.


BBC News - Ryanair ash cloud case: EU's top court rules against airline

For once I have to agree with MoL here.

An Ash Cloud is not their fault and if their flights are forcibly grounded then they shouldn't have to pay 100% compensation

In fairness to Michael O Leary the insurance companies have got off scot free, on this one you would think they would have some part to play in this

From RTE News

At least the airline industry now has the answer.

Bottom line is all airlines have a duty of care and in my opinion that is a good news story.

The ash cloud may have been an Act of God but it wasn't up to God to look after the passengers.

Ridiculous. Are not margins thin enough already?

I have nothing but contempt for Ryanair but I have much, much more contempt for the EU.
What a bunch of fools.

Stand by for yet another compulsory add-on charge to the cost of Ryanair tickets that you don't get to see until just before the last moment when you click to confirm purchase.

'Ash Cloud delay surcharge' or something.

DB6, agree - yet another reason for leaving EU!

Only a bunch of crazy bureaucrats could make a decision such as this.

Whilst I am in favour of consumer rights I think it is idiocy to ask airlines to cough up for delays which are outside their control.

I hope the airlines pursue this to the High Court in Strasbourg (or is it Luxembourg?) and appeal if that's at all possible.

Those responsible for closing the airspace...should be required to pay, not the airlines.

This really baffles me. I would expect Ryanair to repatriate me when the airspace opens up again but how can they be responsible for ALL my costs incurred by the ash cloud?

Who else is responsible? Ryanair just fly me from A to B, but what about my taxi driver? Is he responsible to bring me back to my hotel? What bout my hotel? Should they pay me compensation for the fact that I cannot go home? What about the restaurant I was eating in. Should they feed me till it is all over?

WHAT ABOUT MYSELF? SHOULD I EXPECT THE UNEXPECTED WHEN TRAVELING ABROAD? Or do I hand over all responsibility?

such things as ash clouds are specifically disallowed,according to the caa website,as weather phenomena.airline still liable for accommodating pax,however.

So if my train is cancelled due to "wrong type of snow" or "leaves on the line" can I claim my hotac and expenses from the train company?

The Ash cloud could quite easily have seen the demise of some airlines. Why should only the airlines pick up the bill? So the Ash cloud stranded you but you don't want to share any of the financial burden.

And as "God" doesn't actually exist how can this be used as a defence by the insurers?

wasn't 2euro being added for this anyway, to the ticket cost?

@victorc10

I can see a large disclaimer in the not to distant future ` we are advising that due to a high level of volcano ash , we strongly advice not to fly through it - but if , as an airline you accept the risk then its down to you , but we advise against it, but we are not closing the airspace , but if you have an accident its down to the airline company`

fmgc, my use of the words Act of God and God is an insurance definition.

Notwithstanding that it is now apparently up to the airlines to insure against the unpredictable.

Good luck trying that, Bob! ;)

Both sides have a point.
But that is what insurances should be for.
In the Icelandic volcano case the insurance companies hided also behind the " act of God" and for the vast majority did not compensate their custommers stranded pax.

Having been on the wrong side of the Atlantic at the time the thing erupted, I could watch first hand how the various airlines coped with it.

The very good ones ( LH, DE among others) sent regularly SMS to their pax, keeping them informed and then sent empty aircraft to take back the starnded pax once the airspace was open. ( I was with them fortunately)
The good ones,( the majority) diveterd flights to take slowly the load and re-routed their pax on other airlines.
The bad ones just resumed the normal flights and only took stranded pax back depending on the free seats on board. That took days..
The very bad ones did not bother and offered refund of the cancelled flights , up to you to find a seat back. Some were stranded 10 days .. Some Government charetered aircraft to get their people back.

If you had money , no problem , but if you were a family with 2 kids and your holiday budget was gone, and of course you were on the cheaper last category airlines, this was tragic. I saw complete families sleeping in the terminals, begging for food and water.

How you treat your pax should make you chose your airline, but we know that, not the average pax. So I understand the ruling.

For once I also feel a teensy weensy bit sorry for MOL. This kind of eventuality is precisely what insurance companies are for, surely?

Do they have a list of all the potential "acts of God?"
Who actually decides whether an "act of God" has occurred. Her herself?
Why did MOL (who sells so much worthless insurance), not buy some extended cover himself?

If volcanic ash is an act of God, what happens to claims related to accidental engine ingestion of volcanic ash? "Sorry squire, that's an act of God, so not a normal engine ingestion claim!"

The insurance industry should have picked up the tab here, and not MOL or any airline.

PS. Mind you, I bet he regrets taking a measly £900 claim to court, and for that - serves him right!

Airspace Closure Insurance Cover Exists
 

The reality is that even during the events of the ash clouds, there have been insurers that did not recognise (or have been forced not to, whatever you like most) this even as an act of God and provided coverage.
HSBC was among these.
MOL and his lawyers knew this.
For a big airline it should not be an issue to negotiate a good deal for a "tailored" travel insurance to charge back to the passenger.
I see the points that EU is full of bureaucrats, but it is also true that most people are far from being able to self covering themselves (for many reasons, including those who are generally unaware). Therefore minimum compulsory protections should apply.
Like the car insurance, if you wish.

Ulxima

Is it fair to blame the EU court? They were only ruling on what the law says. If you want different laws you have to vote for different governments :-)

Ryanair Loses EU Fight Over Ash Cloud Row

The question is why haven't they been doing that? Shouldn't airlines understand their legal liabilities and factor the cost into their overheads? Presumably airlines are able to buy insurance just as easily and perhaps more cheaply than passengers?