ANSWER · UK 261 AND EC 261

A fuel problem delayed my flight. Can I claim?

It depends where the fuel problem sat. The Court held on 7 July 2022 in the SATA case that a generalised failure of an airport's fuelling system, where the airport runs that system, is an extraordinary circumstance under Art. 5(3). A fuel fault confined to one aircraft is an ordinary technical problem the airline answers for. Compensation needs a 3 hour arrival delay either way.

REVIEWED AGAINST RULE SET V6 AND THE CITED PRIMARY SOURCES · UPDATED 7 AUGUST 2026

Airport infrastructure versus the aircraft

Refuelling is normally part of an airline's activity, so problems there normally stay with the airline. The SATA judgment moved the event outside the carrier only because the failure was general and the system belonged to Lisbon airport: an event external in origin and beyond the carrier's actual control.

Fuel on the runway is its own category

In Moens, petrol spilled on a Treviso runway closed it for more than two hours. The Court held that qualified too, provided the fuel did not come from the carrier's own aircraft, because runway maintenance is not the airline's job and the closure decision binds it.

What the airline still has to show

The defence has a second limb: reasonable, satisfactory and timely re-routing with all the resources at the carrier's disposal, including seats on other operators, short of an intolerable sacrifice. An airline that parked its passengers and waited has not shown that.

THE JUDGMENTS BEHIND THIS ANSWER

Moens, C-159/182019 SATA (fuelling failure), C-308/212022

SOURCES

Case C-308/21 KU, OP and GC v SATA International - Azores Airlines, judgment of 7 July 2022 (ECLI:EU:C:2022:533) · EUR-Lex · checked 7 August 2026
Case C-159/18 Moens v Ryanair, judgment of 26 June 2019 · EUR-Lex · checked 7 August 2026
Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, Art. 5(3) · EUR-Lex · checked 7 August 2026