C-139/11 · 2012 · EC 261
Joan Cuadrench Moré v Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij NV
Time limits for a Regulation 261/2004 claim come from national law. The Court held in 2012 that the deadline for bringing an action for compensation under Articles 5 and 7 is determined by each Member State's own limitation rules, and not by the two year period in Art. 35 of the Montreal Convention.
REVIEWED AGAINST RULE SET V6 AND THE CITED PRIMARY SOURCES · UPDATED 7 AUGUST 2026
- COURT
- Court of Justice of the European Union (Third Chamber)
- CASE NUMBER
- C-139/11
- JUDGMENT
- 22 November 2012
- CITATION
- ECLI:EU:C:2012:741
What the case was about
A KLM flight from Shanghai to Barcelona was cancelled in December 2005. The passenger sued in Spain in 2009.
KLM argued the claim was out of time under the Montreal Convention's two year limit.
What it changed
- It is the reason a compensation deadline depends on which country's courts hear the claim, and why the answer ranges from one year to ten across Europe.
- The Montreal Convention's two year period does not cap a Regulation 261/2004 compensation claim.
- It makes the departure country a material fact in any claim, because the forum sets the clock.
SOURCES
- Case C-139/11 Cuadrench Moré v KLM, judgment of 22 November 2012 (ECLI:EU:C:2012:741) · EUR-Lex · checked 7 August 2026
- Limitation Act 1980, s. 5 · legislation.gov.uk · checked 7 August 2026