wingview, If the FC were pretty 'shaken up' IMHO they shouldn't be flying at all.

Would it not be a salutary lesson for the courts to also award flight delay/ cancellation compensation to the yobs. In law there is the doctrine of employer`s vicarious liability.What could have happened under this doctrine if the pilot had suffered a serious or permanent injury which led to the loss of his licence. The booze binge haul season has just kicked off and already we have a serious incident. Will it take an awful tragedy for all concerned to address this issue and put an end to it once and for all. As far as I am concerned zero alcohol for all pax with random breath tests at the gate and no alcohol on board.

Landflap - I can understand what you are saying but we have a responsibility to those on the ground as well. Passengers just add a little extra work to our duties so departing empty, whilst fully understandable, means they could also have operated with passengers. You are either fit to fly or you are not. Only if it was the CC who were affected, which is totally understable, would a different outcome be more appropriate. But I don't think this was the case.

What would be justice is if the real offenders were taken to the financially taken to the cleaners.

The main thing to remember in this case is that the incident between the captain and the misbehaving gentlemen in question happened outside of the aircraft after the passengers had left it, after the doors had been opened, and on Spanish soil. Therefore, the aircraft could not be considered 'in flight' as per the Tokyo Convention. As a result, the captain in question had no immunity or special powers under that legislation and the only law applicable was the law of the land they were in. He was effectively a citizen trying to stop and ask other citizens for their identity which he had no right to.

Even though it feels wholly unfair that passengers were awarded compensation for the delay, from a legal point of view the decision makes sense.