· 86 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events May 7, 2026 at 11:40 AM

Airlines still have to pay compensation if flights cancelled due to fuel crisis, EU says

Posted by wasraelx


Airlines still have to pay compensation if flights cancelled due to fuel crisis, EU says
the Guardian
Airlines still have to pay compensation if flights cancelled due to fuel crisis, EU says
Ryanair says that unlike others it will not be cancelling summer flights as it hedged fuel contracts before Iran war

🚩 Report this post

86 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
wasraelx 4 days ago +658
From the article: ‘Airlines that cancel flights because of fuel shortages this summer will still have to compensate passengers under European law, the EU transport commissioner has said. Apostolos Tzitzikostas told the Financial Times that jet fuel prices or shortages do not meet the criteria that protect EU airlines from passenger claims. “The price of jet fuel is the reason why we have cancellations of flights and if they cancel flights without extraordinary circumstances – jet fuel prices are not extraordinary circumstances – they will have to reimburse the people,” the commissioner said.’
658
campelm 4 days ago +436
Acts of Trump are not covered. Really though, you can book a flight a year out. If they can cancel fights because fuel costs change then why would you book in the future with so much uncertainty, if it cost them nothing.
436
wasraelx 4 days ago +158
Lol, I bet ‘acts of Trump’ is a standard industry joke in so many areas these days. Oh to be a fly on the wall in any of the boardrooms of his airline donors now
158
Starfox-sf 4 days ago +25
Maybe they can add another book to the Bible.
25
ChangsManagement 4 days ago +22
Trump 86:47  ^^47 "Atop the verdant grasses of traditions playful field. Where men conduct their affairs in the secretive prose of those unripe with goodness. Trump, The Exhalted, decried unto the crowd: "That stroke didnt count! I'm allowed to try again!"  ^^48 And ye the crowd did see that the stroke had not occured as witnessed. That it were merely a material whisper, prickling the flesh of doubt among their souls. ^^49 It was with this fortitude of faith that Trump, The Golden, procurred the means of victory from the earth. A shimmering orb, white and dimbled, rested neatly in his palm. ^^50 "Birdie" Trump, The Most Greatest, declared in righteous triumph, placing the orb, now a divine instrument of his will, unto the hole in the Earth. 
22
avalon68 4 days ago +1
Maybe he can add it in as a negotiation tactic to end his ongoing feud with the pope.
1
thebarkbarkwoof 1 day ago +2
He thinks he's God, so I guess that fits with the terms and conditions?
2
th3r3dp3n 3 days ago +3
In my job we say Force Moron, rather than Force Majeure
3
Ojntoast 2 days ago +3
They still praise him. Do not get it twisted, it's a cult.
3
thiney49 4 days ago +21
>If they can cancel fights because fuel costs change At least from the quoted part of the article, it sounds like they are canceling because shortages causing them to not be able to purchase fuel, not because it's too expensive.
21
wasraelx 4 days ago +52
From the same article: ‘“I thought I’d seen it all with Covid … but having seen jet fuel go up almost three times – this is much worse,” Tony Fernandes, the chief executive of AirAsia, told the Financial Times. “You wake up one day and your **major cost has tripled** – it was quite a new experience for me and I’ve been through a lot in my life,” he added. [lol 💀] The cost of fuel has spiked since 28 February, when the US and Israel launched their war on Iran. The effective closure of the strait of Hormuz to shipping has choked off oil exports from the Middle East. A spokesperson for Ryanair said: “As **Ryanair has hedged 80% of our jet fuel to March 2027 at $67 per barrel – less than half current spot prices** – we do not plan any cuts to our schedule this summer.” The UK government spokesperson said: **“UK airlines are clear that they are not currently seeing a shortage of jet fuel. Aviation fuel is typically bought in advance and airports and suppliers keep stocks of bunkered fuel to support their resilience.’** — It’s costs, not supply chain issues. The airlines just constantly issue vague statements around the shortages to make it seem causal. They’ve been attacking the EU for decades because it’s basically the only entity that routinely tells them to piss off with these types of excuses
52
thiney49 4 days ago +14
Gotcha, thanks for clarifying.
14
wasraelx 4 days ago +13
You’re welcome, their spokespeople have been on the media rounds for weeks now acting like they’re paid per ‘fuel shortage’ mention. So it’s good to double check that’s just for optics and irl it’s cost of doing business they’re trying to avoid, not genuine scarcity
13
sfw_doom_scrolling 3 days ago +1
Sooo are you saying I shouldn't be anxious that the first real European vacation I've planned for myself in over a decade will be cancelled because of this garbage?
1
m00fster 3 days ago +3
The operating cost of a canceled flight is zero. It would make no sense to not reimburse people
3
Skrukkatrollet 3 days ago +3
If they cancel the flight less than 14 days in advance, and are unable to otherwise get their passengers to their destination within a certain time, they would have to reimburse people, and pay compensation, which would be atleast 125 euro per passenger. If they cancel a flight with 150 passengers, thats atleast an 18750 euro loss for the airline, but very likely much higher, probably more that twice as much. Unless the airline loses that much by operating the flight, it will be cheaper for them to operate the flight.
3
-Allot- 4 days ago +2
*Force Luteus*
2
ezoe 3 days ago +1
So the implication is obvious. Airlines stop accepting long term booking until Trump quit being POTUS.
1
Salt-Detective1337 3 days ago +35
**Exactly** they can't have it both ways. If fuel prices dropped, would they give you a partial refund at the gate? I don't f****** think so.
35
Healthylife55 4 days ago +81
Good. airlines will find any excuse to dodge paying people back
81
NastyPlays 4 days ago +242
It would be insane if they didn't, no cost operating the flights, so why wouldn't you. I have 2.1k in 4 flights, let's hopes this shit gets fixed.
242
Ok_Aside_2361 4 days ago +68
Agree. If we have to change a non-changeable ticket and buy a new one, we are told by them to just suck it up and pay. But they dare to pass their similar fate to us? As THEY say, suck it up and pay. Kudos to the EU.
68
wasraelx 4 days ago +81
Well the cost of operating the flights is mainly the fuel. What the EU did is refuse the airlines the ‘right’ to pass the cost onto passengers, so the airlines have to swallow it. Which is well fair, they keep their profits so why should we swallow their loses. Especially [Ryanair was campaigning against this](https://www.politico.eu/article/ryanair-chief-warns-europe-airline-failures-jet-fuel-costs-spike/) hard, really glad that the EU told them to do one because show me an EU citizen who didn’t swear generational vengeance against Ryanair at some point in their life lol
81
timelessblur 4 days ago +52
No EU refusing to allow the airlines to pass along their increase in fuel after the ticket was already bought. It is pretty basic contract law. It is basically like if you and I had a contract and an agree price for you to build be something for say 1000 bucks. Breaking the contract would be 3000 for you. It is not my problem if your cost spike. That is a you problem. Same case here airline agreed to fly the pay for X price. It is an airline problem thst cost doubled.
52
wasraelx 4 days ago +10
Yea, and in some cases their costs didn’t even increase because they have their fuel reserves. They just try the same BS they get away with in the US here too, and profit of any market disruption no matter if it actually affects them.
10
Atkena2578 4 days ago +3
Earlier this week i bought my tickets for my yearly summer trip to my home country (France) for my kids and I, husband also coming for a couple weeks while kids and I stay 2 months, often the same date range and the prices are about the same as last few years. The only year that was different in price was summer 2021 due to lots of international restrictions due to Covid so I flew for half the cost, having 2 passports we could enter both France and the US with no issues
3
pastalover1 3 days ago +1
Interestingly, many cruise lines passenger contracts include the right to add fuel surcharges after tickets are purchased, if the price of oil exceeds a specified amount. I wonder if airlines could do that too.
1
Maleficent-Stormbee 4 days ago +4
lmao same. they cancelled my flight in covid and i never got my money back. no descendent of mine will fly ryanair!!!
4
wasraelx 3 days ago +3
💀 I’m so sorry, I’m glad you’re keeping the humour tho
3
Tarmacked 4 days ago -6
>They keep their profits so why should we swallow their losses Might be one of the dumber statements I’ve seen. The EU is allowing them to change their pricing, you’re not forced to go bankrupt from making a 10% margin on a service historically.
-6
Zealousideal_Aside96 4 days ago -8
> Well the cost of operating the flights is mainly the fuel. What the EU did is refuse the airlines the right to pass the cost onto passengers, so the airlines have to swallow it. Which is well fair, they keep their profits so why should we swallow their loses. What? 1) that’s not even what happened, they said they could increase the price after the ticket was bought and 2) that’s entirely how business pricing works. Costs go up so prices have to compensate. That’s part of literally selling a product or service. Why would a business need to be forced to lose money on every customer that buys their service?
-8
egnards 4 days ago +6
They are talking about costs already agreed to. If I contract you for 3 months from now I expect to be given the quoted price, it’s not my fault that your costs have gone up. IE, customers who already purchased tickets at a specific price. . .Who would have bought other services \[hotel, tickets to events, rental cars\] based around flights purchased. That said, some contracts will have some allowance for change - Wedding caterers typically have language in their contracts that allow for cost increases up to a certain percentage, based off of food costs.
6
Zealousideal_Aside96 4 days ago -1
That’s exactly what I said, the agreed to ticket price they already bought wasn’t going to change but it’s absurd to prevent a business from increasing prices for their services that aren’t yet sold because of higher input costs.
-1
wasraelx 4 days ago +4
Jeez, I’m sure glad EU makes the policy and not you, and has decided not to let a bunch of airline-owning billionaires notorious for grabbing every penny off the consumer offset their rare loses against the public, and exploit a literal war to scam the citizens of legally protected pre-existing refund frameworks they signed up to. The airlines already have lobbyists and PR teams peddling the nonsense you are pushing here mate, no need to be their volunteer.
4
inosinateVR 4 days ago +3
Is “compensation” referring to a refund for the cancelled flight, or is this like additional compensation for things like hotels you’ve already paid for? Just curious because I was confused at first why it would even be up for discussion (I tried reading the article but it doesn’t seem to clarify what compensation specifically refers to for dumb dumbs like me)
3
Valiantay 2 days ago +2
It's about total compensation, rebooking + additional comp. The wording for "extraordinary circumstances" specifically covers total compensation. Now the addition comp is obviously tied to the very clearly outlined regulations (number of hours the delay can be before specific amounts of compensation are owed).
2
Tarmacked 4 days ago
It’s refunds.
0
Cool-Tangelo6548 3 days ago +1
Not saying its right, nor am i defending them. But i imagine they have to pay people to process returns. So, in their mind, they lose money.
1
Rubicon2-0 4 days ago -3
What would happen if they bankrupcy?
-3
wasraelx 4 days ago +4
Well if they truly can’t afford to run the business without avoiding consumer protection regulations they signed up for decades ago in order to be allowed to operate in the EU, then tough luck. But they can [well afford it](https://investor.ryanair.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/Q3-FY26-Ryanair-Results.pdf).
4
turbogomboc 4 days ago +45
To be fair, they dont even pay compensation now. They drag it out and deny everything, citing technical/safety issues and referring to fineprint making claims ineligible
45
wasraelx 4 days ago +33
Did you file with airlines? If you or your flights are EU, always claim through EU261. I travel loads for work, often multiple times a month and like 70% of it starts or ends in the EU, and never had a compensation denied by EU261 (filed maybe like 5 times in the last 3 years, mostly for delays or delays causing missed connections). One time the delay was 3hrs 7 minutes and one may even let that slide, but it was Ryanair and f*** them lol. And still got the €600 because of those 8 minutes even when Ryanair staff were going person to person saying it’s not eligible because it’s ’out of their control.’ Like no mate, respectfully shove your complimentary Pret cookies, where’s my legally protected money compensation lmao. Never listen to them, always claim directly with the EU, this is [the link](https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm) and it’s straightforward.
33
turbogomboc 4 days ago +17
Thanks for the link. It was lufthans and the delay was a full day. They had to reschedule to another day via 2 connecting flights losing 2 days of the vacation for 3 people. They gave a 10 eur voucher per person for food at frankfurt airport where a sausage costs 20 eur. All claims were denied by a bot
17
wasraelx 4 days ago +7
Oh man, I’m really sorry, sounds like a nightmare and a common one at that. Please do file a claim again through EU261! The deadlines depend on the exact EU country, but it’s at least 2 years in each and in some it’s 5 years. You’re absolutely eligible for more than €10 airport food voucher, these bastards fr 💀 I absolutely believe you, I’ve seen both Ryanair and KLM just blatantly lie to passengers during delays that they’re not eligible because XYZ so here’s just a lil coffee voucher ‘as a gesture of generosity’ lmao. Thanks for the coffee to sip on while I file with the EU consumer portal you ghouls
7
Ok-Method5635 4 days ago +2
Yeah you are NOT I repeat ABSOLUTELY NOT to take the vouchers or credit or anything at the time, as that’s deemed your ‘compensation’
2
wasraelx 4 days ago +2
Not taking those things is a good advice. But I defo took at least one and still got my full claim, they didn’t even mention this, just sorted in like an hour
2
Setiri 1 day ago +1
This is not true. Read the EU261/2004 regulation.
1
Ok-Method5635 4 days ago +6
Absolutely! I had this with Lufthansa, they initially provided I was due £800 in compensation for 2 delayed flights. I had email confirmation from them directly with the value owed. I was then ghosted for 6months - no payments, despite any repeats of process still providing comp was due. Then went to the German ombudsman (can’t remember the name) who began arbitration. They ultimately said they could get me £100 or I could risk taking it to court…… Absolutely shit. They literally have 0 recourse unless you spend several thousands on court cases..
6
ruppert777x 4 days ago +3
Ive had to file it twice and made out both times, hardly any effort. Never an issue.
3
gayscout 3 days ago +1
I've had to go after Lufthansa because they were requiring my IBAN number, which most American banks don't have. Getting them to refund my credit card was an ordeal.
1
beiherhund 2 days ago +1
I've had good success with FinnAir. Pretty painless process and was paid out in a few days. I know others who've had similar experiences with other airlines too but looking at your later comment and someone else's, perhaps it's just a Lufthansa thing.
1
memrph 4 days ago +51
While do I feel the headline would be so much different if it said USA vs EU.
51
wasraelx 4 days ago +67
… well because these would be different headlines? EU is expected to stand with citizen rights tbh, while in the US this would be slammed as leftie nonsense
67
memrph 4 days ago +21
Yes, I know. That was my point of the comment, sorry if it got lost in translation. And have a great day!
21
wasraelx 4 days ago +6
Mate I’m so autistic it was probably me who misread the tone lol, have a great day too!:)
6
KekistanPeasant 4 days ago +9
"Government forces MASSIVE LOSSES onto aviation sector" or something along those lines would be my guess
9
SamohtGnir 4 days ago +10
As opposed to what, cancel the flight and say sorry too bad? They really need to get their shit together. If the airline cancels it, refund the money. If the passenger cancels it, partial refund. And stop over booking!
10
wasraelx 4 days ago +10
Oh you know that the airlines would absolutely do precisely that if they weren’t obligated to compensate. Just look at the [prices of medicine in the US versus the EU](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/cost-of-insulin-by-country) - same product, same companies, and price comparisons of like $1400 versus €8. They’ll do whatever they can get away with.
10
Setiri 1 day ago +2
This has nothing to do with refunds. This is about compensation under EU261/2004 Regulation. The compensation is set at a standard amounts based on a few different factors. This is a determination that fuel prices cannot be used as an exceptional event.
2
InfinityComplexxx 4 days ago +10
Oh, to live in a part of the world with a real government.
10
RampantJellyfish 4 days ago +8
Does this apply to the UK? Or is this another "brexit benefit"
8
wasraelx 4 days ago +14
Broadly speaking yes, it still applies under the [UK261](https://ukairpassengerrights.co.uk/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=22591723645&utm_term=uk261%20claim&utm_content=179177957205&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22591723645&gclid=Cj0KCQjw8PDPBhCeARIsAOJwmWUwOizVpvLr_EK20WSExlWLMukfSEqaqZzECY8N3MlnECeuGyNOgdwaAgPfEALw_wcB), and it’s mostly kept the same: automatic compensations for delays over 3hrs, refunds for serious rerouting, hotels and meals to be provided during disruptions, and ofc compensation for cancellations unless the airline can prove ‘extraordinary circumstances.’ It’s still running on the same [EU261 infrastructure](https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm), you just file on a different page. But the UK can diverge here (or indeed on any of it) and allow the airlines off the hook. It’s an independent system now, so any successive govt can do away with it, unlike with EU legislation. So this pronouncement does not automatically protect you as a UK passenger, but it still does if your flights are within the EU
14
AnomalyFriend 4 days ago +20
Well duh, they're not getting what they paid for? Why wouldn't they get refunds for a cancelled flight? The airline shouldn't pocket the money??? Hello??
20
BoopingBurrito 4 days ago +15
The question wasn't refunds, but compensation. Right now if you arrive more than a certain amount of time late compared to your original booking, then you're entitled to compensation. The scenario they're looking at here is if they, for example, cancel the 8am, midday, 4pm and 6pm flights because they can move all those passengers onto the 10pm flight and save a bunch of fuel. Under existing rules many of those passengers would be entitled to compensation of varying amounts.
15
phosdick 3 days ago +5
We DO KNOW that airlines generally require payment well in advance to reserve a seat on a plane... carriers providing reliable transportation is the fundamental bargain they make when they take your money for a ticket - especially when they take it in advance. There is absolutely no more fundamental rule here than this: >If you don't fly me as agreed, you cannot keep my money! ... any other outcome is simply stealing.
5
KebabAnnhilator 4 days ago +7
Most airlines are cancelling flights citing War as the cause. Which isn’t covered under compensation guidelines.
7
wasraelx 4 days ago +21
Unless they fly over the affected airspace, they cite war —> fuel cost, as an ‘act of God’ clause to void those bookings and avoid paying compensation under the EU scheme. So it’s not war directly, unless they fly over the war zone or directly adjacent, but it’s focusing on drumming up the war as the cause of the fuel price rise. What this does is effectively reaffirm that fuel costs are the airlines responsibility and not something that voids their obligations under EU consumer protection frameworks like the [Regulation (EC) 261/2004](https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_en.htm) which grants automatic compensation right on delays and cancellations except in ‘extraordinary circumstances.’ Temporary fuel cost spike doesn’t qualify as such
21
str85 4 days ago +6
As opposed to just stealing the money? This is like saying the sun will rise tomorrow as well
6
wasraelx 4 days ago +8
You know how airlines are lol. Most of them figured they can treat the passengers like cattle and they haven’t looked back
8
west0ne 4 days ago +5
There's a difference between refund and compensation; the compensation payment is on top of the ticket price refund.
5
jamie9000000 4 days ago +2
I'm flying with Easyjet next month. I can see them trying to wriggle out of paying any sort of compensation if they cancel my flight.
2
Marconidas 2 days ago +2
Airline companies have using for decades a supply-and-demand algorithm to put dynamic prices on the tickets, greatly increasing the price of a plane ticket when people buy the ticket days before the flight happens. As a result of this, most people nowadays will buy their tickets months in advance to get cheaper flights. However the costs - the salaries of the pilot, the co-pilot, the flight comissionairs, the food, the taxes for airport use, etc, of a flight happening right now in May 2026 are only be paid ... well, in May. But airline companies have getting this flight money since late 2025 at least and will lend this money to financial and be paid interest. And actually airlines nowadays get a lot of their annual profits by interest. Now, the problem of such a system of getting paid in advance and generating revenue from interest is that if a major cost greatly increases, companies can't just retroactively charge their consumers with higher prices to cover the cost. Basic contract law. The companies involved must either provide the service that was contracted upon, even if it comes as a loss, or pay their consumers not only the price of their tickets but some compensation as well. Seeing how airline companies "are too big to let fall" and got bailed out by the public budget during the pandemic, unfortunately I expect the same will happen this time.
2
veryboredatwork 4 days ago +4
I imagine you can hedge all you want but if there is no physical fuel available, you can’t fly.
4
GreenHorror4252 4 days ago +3
There will always be fuel available, at the right price.
3
west0ne 4 days ago +1
I assume that this is why some are cancelling far enough in advance that they don't have to compensate; if things start to get worked out they can always reinstate flight s**** and just charge more for a seat on the new flight. They have to refund ticket price paid but they aren't into having to sort alternative flights or put people up in hotels or feed them at airports.
1
BusyHands_ 4 days ago +1
American Govt: Lol! Have you even said Thank You.
1
mrwilliams117 3 days ago +1
I mean... No duh? Who thinks airlines should keep money that they didn't end up providing the service for?
1
SomolianDaycare 4 days ago -3
What of cancelled due to Hantavirus?
-3
KebabAnnhilator 4 days ago +8
Medical biologist here. Orthohantavirus’ have been around for decades. There’s been hundreds of outbreaks. It’s not a pandemic level disease. Yes it’s deadly. But it’s also extremely docile in its transmission.
8
Whatsth3dill 4 days ago +3
I mean, thats what we assume to be the case, but if that flight attendant has it after being on a plane with someone for at most an hour, don't you need to change your perception of the disease?
3
SenatorAslak 4 days ago +4
Last I heard there was no confirmation yet that the flight attendant contracted it, but rather that she was being quarantined as a precaution. It’s possible she merely coincidentally has a cold. Have you heard anything beyond that?
4
BigD3nergy 4 days ago -5
What about Hantavirus outbreaks?
-5
wasraelx 4 days ago +3
That’s not currently affecting aviation and if it were to start doing so, the [rules expanded during Covid](https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/coronavirus-response/travel-during-coronavirus-pandemic/travel-during-pandemic-faq_en) would probably be fast to redraft for it specifically.
3
jvs8380 4 days ago -6
Airlines operate on thin margins. How long before the fuel crisis bankrupts every airline?
-6
Fallom_ 4 days ago +7
Guess they should’ve worked harder against authoritarians instead of trying to placate them.
7
Beardofella 4 days ago +9
Well then their business model wasn’t sound, capitalism etc…
9
← Back to Board