When an airline can refuse compensation
An airline doesn’t have to pay when the cause was an extraordinary circumstance it couldn’t have avoided even with all reasonable measures, and it has to prove it. The CAA says technical faults generally don’t count.
What the CAA says counts
| The reason they gave | Excuses compensation? |
|---|---|
| Weather unsafe to fly in | Can excuse it |
| Air traffic control restrictions or strikes | Can excuse it |
| Strikes outside the airline (border staff, airport) | Can excuse it |
| Security risks, terrorism, sabotage, political unrest | Can excuse it |
| A hidden manufacturing defect (a fleet grounded by recall) | Can excuse it |
| A technical fault | Generally not |
| The airline’s own crew shortage or staff strike | Not |
What to ask for if they refuse
Ask the airline to name the cause and show why it couldn’t have been avoided. Our claim letter asks for this in its own words. If it still says no, give it eight weeks or its final answer, then take it to its dispute scheme or the CAA.
Questions
Is a technical fault an extraordinary circumstance?
Generally not: the CAA says technical problems are not an extraordinary circumstance. Hidden manufacturing defects, such as a manufacturer recall grounding a fleet, and damage from sabotage or terrorism can be.
Does a strike count?
Strikes outside the airline, such as by air traffic control or border staff, can count. The airline’s own staff strikes are the airline’s problem.
Who has to prove it?
The airline. UK261 excuses it only if it can prove the cancellation came from extraordinary circumstances that could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken.
Where these facts come from
- CAA: am I entitled to compensation?, read 8 November 2026
- UK261, Article 5 (cancellations), read 8 November 2026
- CAA: claiming for costs and compensation, read 8 November 2026