C-402/07 and C-432/07 · 2009 · UK 261 AND EC 261
Sturgeon and Others v Condor Flugdienst; Böck and Lepuschitz v Air France
Sturgeon created the three hour rule. The Court held that passengers on a delayed flight may claim compensation under Art. 7 where they suffer a loss of time of three hours or more, meaning they reach the final destination three hours or more after the scheduled arrival. Regulation 261/2004 as written gives compensation for cancellation, not delay.
REVIEWED AGAINST RULE SET V6 AND THE CITED PRIMARY SOURCES · UPDATED 7 AUGUST 2026
- COURT
- Court of Justice of the European Union (Fourth Chamber)
- CASE NUMBER
- C-402/07 and C-432/07
- JUDGMENT
- 19 November 2009
- CITATION
- ECLI:EU:C:2009:716
What the case was about
Two references reached the Court together. The Sturgeon family's Condor flight from Toronto to Frankfurt arrived about 25 hours late, and the airline treated it as a delay rather than a cancellation.
In the second reference, an Air France service from Vienna to Mexico City was replaced by a flight leaving the next day under a different number.
The referring courts asked where the line between a long delay and a cancellation sits, and whether a delayed passenger can claim the fixed sums in Art. 7.
What it changed
- Compensation stopped depending on the label an airline puts on a disruption. A flight operated broadly to its original plan stays a delay however late it runs.
- The three hour threshold is measured at arrival at the final destination, not at the gate on departure.
- The Court kept the Art. 5(3) defence intact: a carrier that proves extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken does not pay compensation.
SOURCES
- Joined Cases C-402/07 and C-432/07 Sturgeon v Condor, judgment of 19 November 2009 (ECLI:EU:C:2009:716) · EUR-Lex · checked 7 August 2026
- Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, Art. 7 · EUR-Lex · checked 7 August 2026