Image via Shutterstock
The legal firm pursuing flight delay compensation says it will push ahead with thousands of outstanding claims after Jet2 and Thomson Airways were denied permission to appeal High Court rulings.
The original landmark judgements in the Huzar V Jet2 and Dawson V Thomson cases were said to open up the aviation industry to potentially billions of pounds of claims.
The Supreme Court has turned down the appeals application for both, meaning that claims pending the decision can now go ahead.
David Bott, senior partner at Bott & Co, said: “This is a landmark day not just for Mr Huzar and Mr Dawson but for passengers everywhere.
“Two journeys which started with a delay have now finished, nearly eight years later in Mr Dawson’s case. Bott & Co has thousands of clients whose claims have been on hold pending today’s decisions.
“We will now be writing to the airlines, asking them to acknowledge the judgments, recognise their obligations and deal with these claims as promptly as possible.
“The Supreme Court’s decision has provided total clarity in the law, which will benefit both airlines and passengers going forward.
“We here at Bott & Co are proud of our part in this victory that will benefit millions of consumers each year and brings this country’s law in line with other European countries.”
The Huzar ruling means airlines must pay flight compensation for delays caused by technical problems as these are not considered an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ under flight compensation regulation EU261.
The Dawson judgment confirmed consumers in England and Wales have six years to bring a claim for flight delay compensation.
Bott & Co estimates 2.36 million passengers per year in England and Wales will benefit from the Huzar decision, equivalent to approximately £876 million in compensation claims.
And it claims the Dawson case has opened up an estimated £3.89 billion in historic flight compensation.
In a statement Thomson said: “We believe that it is reasonable to expect that those who perceive they have suffered a real loss as a result of an unfortunate delay should be able to make their claim within two years.
“We are surprised and disappointed to note the decision of the Supreme Court as we believe our position is sound in law. We will now review this position based on the court’s decision.”