EU261 Delay Compensation: What a Delay Is Worth

Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council creates a fixed payment when a flight arrives three hours or more late, provided the cause is not an extraordinary circumstance. The payment is not a refund, not a rebooking, and not a reimbursement of expenses. It is a statutory entitlement that exists independently of the ticket price, the fare class, and whether the passenger was travelling for business or leisure. The amount depends on the distance of the flight, not on the price paid.

The regulation applies to flights departing from an airport in the EU, the EEA, or the UK, on any airline, and to flights arriving in the EU, the EEA, or the UK on an airline established in one of those places. A flight from a non-EU airport to the EU on a non-EU carrier falls outside the scope. The UK retained the same structure in law after 2020, so the amounts and thresholds are parallel, but the two regimes are separate instruments and a claim must be brought under the one that covers the flight.

The distance bands and the amounts

The regulation sets three fixed amounts. They are not adjusted annually and they are not indexed. The figures below are the ones in the regulation as it stands; they have not changed since 2004.

The reduction in the long-haul band is the part most often missed. A flight of more than 3,500 km that arrives three hours and one minute late is worth EUR 300, not EUR 600. The full EUR 600 applies only when the delay reaches four hours. This is not an airline policy; it is written into Article 7(2) of the regulation.

The three-hour threshold and how it is measured

The entitlement arises on arrival, not on departure. A flight that leaves four hours late and makes up time in the air, arriving two hours and fifty minutes late, does not create an entitlement. A flight that leaves on time and circles for three hours does. The measurement is the difference between the scheduled arrival time and the actual time the aircraft door is opened, not the time the wheels touch the runway.

A cancellation gives a different entitlement: the passenger may choose between a refund and re-routing, and compensation is payable unless the airline gave at least fourteen days’ notice or can show extraordinary circumstances. A denial of boarding against the passenger’s will, on an overbooked flight, triggers the same amounts as a delay, without a three-hour threshold.

Extraordinary circumstances: the qualifier that decides most claims

Article 5(3) disapplies the compensation obligation when the delay is caused by extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. The regulation does not define the term. The Court of Justice of the European Union has done so in a series of judgments, and the line it has drawn is the one that matters.

Weather that makes the flight unsafe, a strike by air traffic control, a security alert, a political closure of airspace, and a bird strike are generally treated as extraordinary. A technical fault that is inherent in the normal operation of the aircraft is generally not. The distinction is not between “the airline’s fault” and “not the airline’s fault”; it is between a risk that is part of running an airline and a risk that is external to it. A hydraulic failure discovered during a pre-flight check is a technical fault. A volcanic ash cloud is not.

The airline bears the burden of proving the circumstance and of proving that no reasonable measure could have avoided the delay. A claim refused with the words “technical reasons” and nothing more is a refusal that has not met that burden. The passenger does not have to prove the cause; the airline has to establish the exemption.

Worked calculation

A passenger holds a ticket from Lisbon to São Paulo, a distance of approximately 7,900 km, and the flight arrives three hours and twenty minutes late. The cause is a technical fault with the aircraft’s pressurisation system, discovered before departure. The airline is established in the EU.

Step 1: Identify the regime.
  Flight departs the EU, so Regulation 261/2004 applies.

Step 2: Identify the band.
  Distance is more than 3,500 km, so the band is long-haul.

Step 3: Identify the delay at arrival.
  Actual arrival minus scheduled arrival = 3 hours 20 minutes.
  3 hours 20 minutes is at least 3 hours, so the threshold is met.

Step 4: Check the reduction.
  Delay is between 3 and 4 hours, so the amount is reduced by 50%.
  EUR 600 x 0.50 = EUR 300.

Step 5: Check for extraordinary circumstances.
  Technical fault is generally not extraordinary.
  The airline would have to show otherwise.

Entitlement: EUR 300 per passenger, under Article 7(1)(c) and 7(2).

If the same flight had arrived four hours and ten minutes late, the reduction would not apply and the entitlement would be EUR 600. If the cause had been a strike by air traffic control in Portuguese airspace, the entitlement would be zero, because the airline would be able to rely on Article 5(3).

Claiming directly, without a claims company

The airline is the correct first recipient. Most carriers provide a claim form on their own website, and the regulation does not require the passenger to use a claims company, a lawyer, or a national enforcement body before writing to the airline. A written claim should state the flight number, the date, the booking reference, the scheduled and actual arrival times, and the amount claimed under the regulation. It should be sent to the airline’s customer relations address, not to the airport or the travel agent.

The airline has no statutory deadline to respond, but national enforcement bodies in most member states expect a reply within a set period, often eight weeks. If the airline refuses, the passenger can complain to the national enforcement body of the country of departure, or of the country of arrival if the flight departed outside the EU. Those bodies do not award compensation themselves; they supervise the airline. The alternative is a court claim in the member state where the flight departed or arrived, and the amounts are small enough that most such claims fall within simplified procedures.

A claims company typically takes between 25% and 35% of the amount recovered, plus VAT in some jurisdictions. For a straightforward claim against a large carrier, that share buys very little: the procedure is a form and a wait. For a claim against a carrier that has refused on a contested point of law, or where the airline is in administration, the share may buy something. The regulation does not require the passenger to use one, and the airline cannot insist on it.

What people get wrong

The most common error is to treat the ticket price as the measure. The regulation pays a fixed amount per passenger, so a EUR 40 fare and a EUR 900 fare on the same route produce the same entitlement. The second error is to assume that any delay over three hours pays. The threshold is on arrival, and the long-haul band reduces the amount between three and four hours. The third is to accept “technical reasons” as a final answer. The airline must show that the fault was extraordinary, and in most cases a technical fault is not.

The mistake is natural because the airline’s first response is written to close the file, not to apply the regulation. The passenger reads a refusal that sounds authoritative and stops. The regulation places the burden on the airline, and a refusal that does not name the extraordinary circumstance and explain why no reasonable measure could have avoided it has not discharged that burden.

What the airline page will not say

The airline’s own delay page will explain how to rebook and how to claim expenses. It will rarely state the fixed amounts, because the amounts are not its policy and it gains nothing by publishing them. It will rarely explain that a technical fault is generally not an extraordinary circumstance, because that is the ground on which most refusals rest. The regulation is the source, and the source is public.

Where the regimes differ

A flight within the EU is covered by Regulation 261/2004 as interpreted by the Court of Justice. A flight to or from the UK is covered by the UK’s retained version, which uses the same bands and thresholds but is enforced by the Civil Aviation Authority and interpreted by UK courts. A flight to or from the US is not covered by either; the US Department of Transportation requires a refund when a flight is cancelled or significantly changed and the passenger chooses not to travel, but it does not create a fixed delay payment. The Montreal Convention, which applies to international carriage, provides for damages for proven loss, not for a fixed sum on arrival delay. The instruments are separate and a passenger may be able to rely on more than one, but not for the same loss twice.