The European Court considers that, under certain conditions, passengers may claim compensation for non-material damage in addition to that awarded for material damage suffered in the event of cancellation of a flight.

The Court of Justice of the European Union has made public its considerations regarding the claims presented by several families that were all booked on an Air France flight from Paris to Vigo on 25 September 2008. The flight took off as planned, but returned to Charles de Gaulle airport a short time later due to a technical problem with the aircraft. The Court's decision is based on the conclusions from the Advocate General Eleanor Sharpston of June 2011, which stated that a passenger may claim compensation for cancellation of a flight where his aeroplane took off but, for whatever reason, was subsequently forced to return to the airport of departure and that passenger was transferred to another flight.

The Court explains that the concept of ‘further compensation’ allows a national court to compensate non-material damage arising from breach of a contract of carriage by air under the conditions provided for by the Montreal Convention or national law. The Court holds that ‘further compensation’ is intended to supplement the application of the standardised and immediate measures provided for by the Regulation (EC) nº261/2004. Therefore, that ‘further compensation’ allows passengers to be compensated for the entirety of the material and non-material damage they suffered due to the failure of the air carrier to fulfil its contractual obligations under the conditions and within the limits provided for by the Montreal Convention or by national law.

Also, the Court adds that where a carrier fails to fulfil its obligations to assist (reimbursement of ticket or re-routing to the final destination, taking into account the cost of transfer between the airport of arrival and the originally scheduled airport) and to take care of costs that fall to it pursuant to the regulation (meal, accommodation and communication costs) air passengers are entitled to claim a right to compensation. Nevertheless, insofar as that compensation arises directly from the regulation, it cannot be considered as falling within ‘further’ compensation.