“The flight was delayed because of air traffic control” is not, by itself, enough to rule out a passenger’s right to compensation. In its judgment of 8 October 2026 in Case C‑108/26 RX, the Court of Justice of the European Union made clear that the actual cause of the delay must be examined. It did not announce new compensation amounts or decide that every delayed passenger is entitled to a payment.

The judgment matters in practice when an airline gives a general explanation: an air traffic management decision is one thing; the event that caused it is another. That underlying event must be examined, together with its connection to the particular flight and the measures the carrier could have taken.

What the Court actually decided

The case concerned a flight in 2023 and the review of an earlier General Court judgment. In the full judgment in Case C‑108/26 RX, the Court distinguishes the air traffic control decision itself from its underlying cause. Referring to restrictions, a slot or traffic management does not complete the required proof.

For an event to qualify as an extraordinary circumstance, it must not be inherent in the normal exercise of the carrier’s activity and must be beyond its actual control. These are two cumulative criteria, applied to the specific facts. Even then, the airline must show that the delay could not have been avoided by taking all reasonable measures. The judgment did not automatically award the €400 claimed in the case.

Severe weather preventing a flight from being operated safely may, for example, be an actual extraordinary cause. Its classification, its effect on the particular flight and the reasonable measures taken are assessed by the competent court; weather explanations are neither always rejected nor accepted without evidence.

The three hours are measured at arrival

Under the applicable framework, fixed compensation for a long delay depends on arrival at the final destination at least three hours late. Departing three hours late does not, on its own, establish an equivalent arrival delay. For connecting flights, the final destination of the relevant booking and the application of the rules to that particular itinerary matter.

Regulation 261/2004 does not cover every flight anywhere in the world. Its main situations include departure from an EU airport and, subject to the relevant conditions, arrival in the EU from a third country with a Community carrier. Before calculating an amount, the scope of the rules, the booking, the distance and the reasons for the delay must be established. The official EU guide to air passenger rights explains these basic distinctions.

How much the current framework provides

Fixed compensation is set at €250, €400 or €600, depending on distance and itinerary. For flights of up to 1,500 kilometres, the basic amount is €250. For intra-EU flights of more than 1,500 kilometres and other flights between 1,500 and 3,500 kilometres, it is €400. The €600 band applies to the remaining longer routes, subject to the adjustments provided by law.

It is incorrect to say that “a three-hour delay always means €600”. In particular, for a route outside the intra-EU category exceeding 3,500 kilometres, an arrival delay of three to less than four hours may correspond to €300. Rules allowing a reduction may also apply in rerouting cases. An amount cannot be calculated without checking the actual conditions and exceptions.

When a delay has several causes

A flight may be delayed for different reasons during the same day. The Court states that, when assessing the three-hour threshold, the time demonstrably attributable to an extraordinary circumstance meeting the conditions for exemption is deducted. It is not enough to attribute the entire delay to a general incident.

If the airline relies on a problem affecting an earlier leg operated by the same aircraft, there must be a direct causal link to the later delay. A general reference to fleet problems or a difficult day does not replace an explanation about your own flight. It is therefore useful to request specific reasons and, where available, a breakdown of the periods of delay.

Care and compensation are separate rights

Financial compensation must not be confused with the duty to provide care. Depending on the waiting time and the route, passengers may be entitled to meals, refreshments, communication facilities and, where an overnight stay is necessary, accommodation and transport. An extraordinary circumstance does not remove all passenger rights at once.

If care was not offered and you incurred necessary, reasonable expenses, keep the receipts and request reimbursement with a clear description. Ticket reimbursement and alternative transport also have their own conditions. Different claims should not be added together as though they were all automatic and identical in every situation.

What to keep and what to ask for

  1. Keep the booking confirmation, boarding pass and any notifications of changes to the flight.
  2. Record the scheduled and actual arrival at the final destination, together with the available supporting evidence.
  3. Ask the airline in writing which specific event caused the delay and how it was connected to your flight.
  4. Keep receipts for necessary expenses, without assuming that any expense will be reimbursed without limit.
  5. If the claim is rejected with a general explanation, check the competent authority and the complaints procedure available for the route. A complex case or a question about time limits requires individual legal assessment.

A useful first question is: “What was the actual cause of the air traffic control decision, and what reasonable measures did you take to reduce my delay?” This question does not guarantee payment, but it asks for the explanation that has legal significance. Booking references and document numbers do not need to be made public; provide necessary details only to the appropriate recipient of your request.

Take care with changes that apply later

The amending Regulation (EU) 2026/2202 has already been published. It provides for entry into force on 22 October 2026 and application from 23 October 2027. This article, with sources checked on 13 October 2026, explains the framework applicable today and the new judgment; it does not present future changes as already applicable.

For the new criterion concerning air traffic control, the full judgment takes priority over earlier general lists of “extraordinary circumstances”. An official summary is also available in Court of Justice press release 144/26. For further information supported by sources, see the Nomika Epilekta articles.

Nomika Epilekta Editorial Team. Written and language edited with artificial intelligence assistance, with the cited official sources checked on 13/10/2026. The image is an original AI illustration. This text provides general legal information and does not replace advice on an individual case.