A German court has ruled that airlines shouldn’t have to reimburse passengers for an aperol spritz consumed during a delay, because it’s not refreshing…
In this post:
Passengers sue airline over aperol spritz reimbursement
The European Union has among the strongest consumer protections for flight delays, in the form of EU261 compensation. This clearly dictates what airlines owe passengers in the event of irregular operations. We’ve seen courts hear all kinds of cases involving EU261, though this has to be one of the more interesting ones.
In this case, the plaintiffs had booked a flight from Miami to Hanover via New York and London. The London to Hannover flight was canceled, and they ended up being rebooked to Hamburg via Madrid, and from there they’d have to take the train to Hanover, where they arrived 4.5 hours late.
Given the length of the delay, passengers were entitled to €600 compensation each. In addition to that, they sought reimbursement for the costs of meals and refreshments during stopovers, which totaled €20.80 in Madrid and €88 in London.
This is where the dispute arises. The airline allegedly refused to reimburse the passengers for alcoholic drinks that were consumed. The passengers weren’t happy with that, and took the airline to court… yes, over two aperol spritz drinks.
Court rules alcohol doesn’t constitute a “refreshment”
On April 13, 2023, the District Court of Hanover ruled on this case, and sided with the airline. The judge decided that alcoholic beverages are not refreshments, within the rights of what would be permitted as part of the EU261 scheme.
According to the air passenger rights regulations, airlines must offer passengers “meals and refreshments in reasonable proportion to the waiting time.” So, why did the judge decide that alcohol doesn’t constitute a refreshment? It’s argued that alcoholic drinks do the opposite of “refresh” you, and therefore the claim is that alcoholic drinks wouldn’t be covered as part of these requirements.
Interestingly it’s argued that craft beer would potentially be subject to reimbursement, since it could be non-alcoholic, and there would be no way to know.
This is an interesting case, if you ask me. While I’ve submitted some EU261 compensation claims in the past, I’ve never submitted reimbursement for food and drinks. I’d be curious to know if most airlines currently reimburse alcohol, or if all airlines go through each item purchased so carefully.
Bottom line
Taking an airline to court over two alcoholic drinks certainly seems petty, though I guess there’s value in having the precedent set of what should and shouldn’t be reimbursed by airlines. Two travelers were delayed and rerouted, and requested reimbursement for the refreshments they consumed during their layovers, in line with EU261 regulations.
When the airline was unwilling to reimburse the passengers for two aperol spritz drinks, the passengers decided to take the airline to court. The passengers ended up losing, as the judge ruled that alcoholic drinks aren’t “refreshments.”
While I’m not sure other airlines would take an equally strict approach, this sure suggests that alcohol wouldn’t technically be subject to reimbursement during delays.
What do you make of this court ruling?
(Tip of the hat to Klaus)
I know this is how it would go down in America, but I'm pretty surprised a German court doesn't consider an alcoholic beverage a refreshment. In Germany you're weird if you *don't* have an alcoholic drink with your meal.
The airline should offer Spritzes to apologize for delays and cancellations as standard. They would have fewer angry passengers.
Seems you missed the point. I think the plantiffs would be given all kinds of compensation and bonuses from other airlines, etc. This is like how athletes do not get as much from wining competitions as they do from the sponsorships.
Given the default rejection on spurious grounds of almost all claims to @BritishAirways (the UK brand of a Spanish registered multinational) whom the routing suggests are the airline, i think having a precedent set warrants the otherwise fatuous case.
Airlines (including formerly respectable ones seem to rely on consumer ignorance for the 40% or so who bother to try and claim. Regulators should do more to enforce consumer rights both in the EU &...
Given the default rejection on spurious grounds of almost all claims to @BritishAirways (the UK brand of a Spanish registered multinational) whom the routing suggests are the airline, i think having a precedent set warrants the otherwise fatuous case.
Airlines (including formerly respectable ones seem to rely on consumer ignorance for the 40% or so who bother to try and claim. Regulators should do more to enforce consumer rights both in the EU & UK as the reality is that the generous legislation is almost never enacted.
Its completely wrong to suggest that taking an airline to court over two alcoholic drinks is petty when many of the airlines act so despicably and absolutely refuse to follow the law until they are legally forced to.
British Airways actively instruct their staff to deny EU261 rerouting rights. BA cancel a flight, call center refused to rebook it on a different flight (4 different times) and then their call center staff automatically issues a...
Its completely wrong to suggest that taking an airline to court over two alcoholic drinks is petty when many of the airlines act so despicably and absolutely refuse to follow the law until they are legally forced to.
British Airways actively instruct their staff to deny EU261 rerouting rights. BA cancel a flight, call center refused to rebook it on a different flight (4 different times) and then their call center staff automatically issues a refund after being explicity told under no circumstances to refund it.
Airlines are absolute scum, they will do absolutely anything to not follow their legal obligations.
No one is shedding a tear for the airlines. It's the court's time (and therefore taxpayer money) that is being wasted.
There should be a max $ allowance and then it should be none ofthe airline business what i spend it on. What’s the deal of excluding alcohol?
So when ordering see if you can get charged for 3 soft drinks but get given a beer or whatever.
Having an overnight at CDG because of a missed connection on Air France (economy) I asked the desk if the meal allowance included wine. Stunned, they answered "certainement, Monsieur, this is France".
My allowance covered the meal while my partner's covered the wine. Merveilleux!
I was delayed in Prague with AF handling the claim for Delta. The phone rep was basically pushing me to get wasted.
These people are effing brain-dead and should pay a fine for stealing the courts time. It should be obvious, that alcoholic drinks do not count as refreshments. If an airline reimburses these, then nice. But otherwise, no way.
Nope, in fact it's the opposite of braindead. It's a reasonable assumption in Europe for a meal to be accompanied with an alcoholic beverage.
In puritan America it may be different.
Luckily many countries are not as anal as the US.
Greedy b—-s if they already got €600 and went to court over a few more euros. This is the state of the world.
Alcohol and tobacco don’t fall under care and assistance so there’s no obligation.
False, it just seems like this particular judge is an anti alcoholic.
Another judges (also in Germany!) a few years ago did rule that champagne cocktails and desert wine are a well known part of a full, satisfying meal and that the airline therefore has to reimburse it under the duty of care.
Another judge ruled that beer usually does cost as much as soft drinks, so it should also be reimbursed.
https://www.drboese.de/blog/ag-memmingen-verpflegung-bei-fluggastrechten-umfasst-auch-alkoholische-getraenke/
False, it just seems like this particular judge is an anti alcoholic.
Another judges (also in Germany!) a few years ago did rule that champagne cocktails and desert wine are a well known part of a full, satisfying meal and that the airline therefore has to reimburse it under the duty of care.
Another judge ruled that beer usually does cost as much as soft drinks, so it should also be reimbursed.
https://www.drboese.de/blog/ag-memmingen-verpflegung-bei-fluggastrechten-umfasst-auch-alkoholische-getraenke/
Really? I stand corrected with my comment. O Tempora , o mores.
Greedy b—-s if IAG (I assume) already got €20 billion and deny a few more euros. This is the state of the world.
No. If someone gets 600. Shut the f.. up and don’t waste a court’s time for 20. Germans are notoriously tight fisted litigious people. They would claim for €1 if they could.
False, the 600€ are compensation for the delay as such.
Duty of care is a completely different topic.
Icarus stop stereotyping you bigot.
only in backwards countries would alcohol be treated differently.
I wonder if it's potentially a liability issue (in terms of the actions someone takes while drunk because they expect the airline to pay for the alcohol)
Unlikely. It's not like airlines are saying "either alcohol or nothing", if the individual chooses to consume alcohol rather than non-alcoholic drinks, then consume it to such a point that they are intoxicated, it would be on the individual.
Generally all EU airlines refuse to cover alcohol as part of claims made, it is well known I would say.
False, in the past there have been two court ruling (also in Germany!) that state alcohol is something that you can claim for reimbursement from the airline. One of these even states that champagne cocktails + desert wine are explicitly part of a full meal.
Use Google Translate:
https://www.drboese.de/blog/ag-memmingen-verpflegung-bei-fluggastrechten-umfasst-auch-alkoholische-getraenke/
Like I said, generally all EU airlienes will refuse to refund alcohol expenses as part of claims, the court ruling does not change that. I understand you do not like it, but hey - maybe next time you will be the one mentioned in the blog, suing some airlines for two glasses of Champagne.
With British Airways, it's known they will reimburse for food and drinks but they will not reimburse alcoholic beverages. When I was stuck last year, they happily paid out for all the food I consumed - we're talking starter, main and dessert in a hotel restaurant and room service another night - without any quibbles at all. I would not have been drinking alcohol anyway, but I already knew they would not reimburse for that.