Denmark-www.pssagerrettgheder.dk

[Hugh]

Originally Posted by Jamesr44

Further to my statemnet above I qoute c-204/08:
which is the operating carrier, the court having jurisdiction to deal with a claim for compensation founded on that transport contract and on Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, is that, at the applicant's choice, which has territorial jurisdiction over the place of departure or place of arrival of the aircraft, as those places are agreed in that contract.

The court (not necessarily a civil court) is in Denmark the NEB appointed by the Government. The civil court is only implied if the parties do not agree to the decision of the NEB.

merriam-webster definition of a court :
a faculty or agency of judgment or evaluation <rest our case in the court of world opinion — L. H. Marks>

James,

Personally I think this is rather an optimistic expansion of the scope of the Rehder ruling -and at least looking at the matter from a UK perspective-I don't think would work as far as the UK NEB was concerned.

Rehder-in my view looks at a properly constituted court.

It talks of not just any "court" but "a court having jurisdiction to deal with a claim for compensation founded on that transport contract".

Again looking from a UK perspective the NEB's sole remit is to "receive complaints ( and presumably "handle" them thereafter). I dont believe it has competence "to deal" with a claim founded on the transport contract.

(This would require it to perform a judicial function. It may be that in other member states power/suthority is given in other members states to NEB's to perform some form of adjudication/judicial function with respect to these claims/complaints in other member states).

It may be that the NEB can make an adjudication-but then that adjudication is then subject to some form of appeal/review by another body such as a civil court or appeal panel).

[Jamesr44]

The Danish NEB is constituted by government law to be the instance having jurisdiction to deal with a claim for compensation founded on that transport contract and on Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance .

If the parties involved disagree with the NEB's decision they can appeal to the local civil court.

If you try to go to court without the NEB´s decision then you must apply for this decision before the court will accept the case.

If you have been awarded the rights to compensation by the NEB and the air carrier will not honour the decision you may be liable to receive free represenation and trial fees for a civil court claim.

If I remember correctly Kramme v SAS was a cancelled flight from Paris to Copenhagen and was settled out of court in Copenhagen.

Remember Denmark is the only EC member where the EC 261/2004 is adopted as common law and if there is a consumer protection organisation it must be heard.

That is my broad view on Hamlets situation in Denmark.

[Hugh]

Originally Posted by Jamesr44

The Danish NEB is constituted by government law to be the instance having jurisdiction to deal with a claim for compensation founded on that transport contract and on Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance .

If the parties involved disagree with the NEB's decision they can appeal to the local civil court.

If you try to go to court without the NEB´s decision then you must apply for this decision before the court will accept the case.

If you have been awarded the rights to compensation by the NEB and the air carrier will not honour the decision you may be liable to receive free represenation and trial fees for a civil court claim.

If I remember correctly Kramme v SAS was a cancelled flight from Paris to Copenhagen and was settled out of court in Copenhagen.

Remember Denmark is the only EC member where the EC 261/2004 is adopted as common law and if there is a consumer protection organisation it must be heard.

That is my broad view on Hamlets situation in Denmark.

James,

As see where you're going-I suppose ultimately its the attitude adopted by the Danish NEB. Would they accept- say- to deal with a complaint from someone travelling from say the UK to Denmark? (Or would they simply the refer the complaint back tothe UK NEB?)

I wonder if Mr Kramme ever delivered an initial complaint to the Danish NEB?

Remember also that a court in the domicile of the carrier would likely accept jurisdiction in any event ( leaving aside the routing). In addition an airline can always choose not to contest the jurisdiction of a court ( if there might be some form of doubt or argument potentially available).

The Swedish NEB publish their ruling I remember from another posting (unfortunately only in Swedish-and only some time after the ruling was initially made).

Does the Danish NEB publish their rulings?

[Jamesr44]

Originally Posted by Hugh

James,

As see where you're going-I suppose ultimately its the attitude adopted by the Danish NEB. Would they accept- say- to deal with a complaint from someone travelling from say the UK to Denmark? (Or would they simply the refer the complaint back tothe UK NEB?)

I wonder if Mr Kramme ever delivered an initial complaint to the Danish NEB?

Remember also that a court in the domicile of the carrier would likely accept jurisdiction in any event ( leaving aside the routing). In addition an airline can always choose not to contest the jurisdiction of a court ( if there might be some form of doubt or argument potentially available).

The Swedish NEB publish their ruling I remember from another posting (unfortunately only in Swedish-and only some time after the ruling was initially made).

Does the Danish NEB publish their rulings?

The Danish NEB does not publish thier rulings (not legaly binding statements) however anybody can demand to receive copies of all relevant documentation to cases handled by the NEB as we have open access to public office files.
In Sweden they are so lucky as to have the Ombudsverket as NEB and the Ombudsman to efectuate their decisions. They also publish twice per year a blacklisting off all air carriers who do not comply with the judgings for compensation claims.

My reason for not accepting the NEB´s not handling claims against air carriers arriving in their region from another EC member state, is that not all EC citizens are proficient in other languages to be able to perform a claim and will therefore need the help from the local NEB to presnet their claim to the foreign NEB. So what is the point of not handling it themselves ?