While air passenger rights are officially enshrined in European Regulation 261/2004, under pressure from aviation lobbies, a European regulatory review and a French decree threaten to severely undermine twenty years of achievements for passengers. Investigation into a social setback where the modest traveller is the adjustment variable.
It is a shadow war, far from the tarmacs and crowded departure lounges. While travellers anxiously scan the departure boards, fearing the cancellation or delay that will ruin their holidays, another, much more decisive battle is being fought in the hushed offices of the European institutions. At the start of 2026, air transport is experiencing unprecedented turbulence, but the threat is not coming from the skies, it is coming from legislation.
A diverse coalition, bringing together low-cost airlines, established major carriers and governments, including France, is on the verge of achieving a historic breakthrough: significantly weakening European Regulation 261/2004, the shield that has guaranteed air passengers’ rights to compensation in the event of operational failure for two decades.
Reform of Regulation 261/2004: towards the end of compensation for 3-hour delays?
It all started with a promise of “modernisation”. But in Brussels technocratic language, modernisation often rhymes with regression: we saw this with the directive on platform workers, where several states, including France, fought in vain to limit its scope in the name of “flexibility”, undermining the position of thousands of precarious workers. With regard to passenger rights, in June 2025, the Council of the European Union, where representatives of the Member States sit, laid its cards on the table: its proposal to revise Regulation 261/2004 had a bombshell effect on consumer associations.
Until now, the golden rule was simple: a three-hour delay on arrival entitled passengers to compensation, a threshold cemented by the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). This threshold, which is a nightmare for airlines and a lifeline for passengers, is at the heart of the current offensive: the Council’s proposal aims to raise it to five hours, or even nine hours for long-haul flights.
Let’s take a concrete example: you are flying from Paris to Athens, a short/medium-haul flight; with a 4½-hour delay today, you are entitled to €400 in compensation, but tomorrow, with a threshold of 5 hours, you would receive nothing. On a Paris–New York flight, an 8-hour delay would no longer give rise to compensation if the new threshold were set at 9 hours.
Why this change? Because the statistics are stubborn: the vast majority of structural delays in Europe fall within the critical range of 3 to 4 hours, as highlighted by several economic analyses. By pushing back the compensation threshold to 5 hours, Member States are giving airlines a gift: with the stroke of a pen, they are eliminating the vast majority of flights that are currently eligible for compensation.
75%
That is the staggering proportion of passengers who would lose all entitlement to compensation if the threshold were raised from 3 to 5 hours. An invisible statistical trick that allows airlines to wipe out almost all of their financial obligations with a stroke of the pen.
EU Council vs Parliament: the political battle over European passenger rights
The reason why the Council of the EU is pushing so hard for this regressive reform is that an air transport alliance has been formed around the states that host the most powerful players in the sector. France is playing a double game: officially protecting passengers, but in practice supporting a line more favourable to the interests of Air France-KLM by accepting the increase in thresholds at the Council. It is supported by Germany, guardian of Lufthansa’s interests, and by Ireland, Ryanair’s state of registration, which defends a position very close to that of low-cost airlines. These governments have chosen their side: the competitiveness of “national champions” takes precedence over the protection of citizens.
In October 2025, the European Parliament’s Transport Committee adopted a diametrically opposed negotiating mandate, advocating maintaining the three-hour threshold and increasing compensation amounts, which had remained unchanged for twenty years despite inflation. In Parliament, resistance to the dismantling of passenger rights has been organised around a broad front, ranging from the radical left to the social democrats, supported by the Greens and part of the centre and the right.
MEPs have made maintaining the three-hour threshold and current compensation levels a red line: “We will not back down on passengers’ existing rights. […] The three-hour threshold for compensation, the current amounts, and real and enforceable guarantees for travellers remain our red lines,” insists EPP rapporteur Andrey Novakov, summarising the majority position of Parliament in response to the demands of airlines and the Council.
On the progressive side, the S&D socialists denounce a reform that “weakens air passengers’ rights to compensation for the benefit of airlines”. The Left and Greens/EFA MEPs are alarmed by a reform that would “deprive up to 80-85% of passengers of their right to compensation” by raising the thresholds, and denounce the use of the climate argument as a form of social greenwashing: the transition must not be used as a pretext to make passengers, often low-cost users on modest incomes, pay for the structural failures of air transport.
So, at the start of 2026, we are witnessing an institutional standoff between the Council of the EU and the European Parliament. On one side, there is the accounting and pro-business logic championed by the Member States; on the other, there is the more protective vision for citizens championed by MEPs. But the balance of power is skewed by the firepower of a third player: the lobbies.
A4E and aviation lobbies: the strategy to cancel your claims
The Council adopted proposals that are so unfavourable to passengers because they were largely suggested by the industry. Companies specialising in compensation, such as Air Indemnité, describe a Brussels scene saturated with airline representatives during consultations and technical meetings.
Founded in 2016, Airlines for Europe (A4E) has become the industry’s spearhead in Brussels, bringing together giants such as Air France-KLM, Lufthansa, Ryanair and easyJet. A4E has succeeded in uniting them against a common enemy: the compensated passenger. In a Joint Industry Position published in October 2025, the strategy is clear: airlines are not only asking for higher thresholds, they are demanding an extensive redefinition of “extraordinary circumstances”.
This legal term is the cornerstone of the system: if a delay is due to an “extraordinary circumstance” (extreme weather, political instability), the airline does not pay, which is logical. But lobbyists are pushing to include frequent technical incidents or air traffic management problems, which are nevertheless their operational responsibility. The aim is simple: to turn the exception into the rule and compensation into a mirage so that they no longer have to pay.
The lobbyists’ argument is well-rehearsed: air passenger rights would be too expensive and would threaten the sector’s “competitiveness”. They cite European Commission estimates putting the annual cost of current obligations at over €8 billion by 2025, and pit legal protection against ticket prices: “if you want rights, you will pay more for your flights”. This is blackmail over affordability that masks an accounting reality: for several large groups, post-Covid profits have returned to or even exceeded their pre-crisis levels, while the cost of compensation remains a fraction of their overall margins.
France: Decree 2025-772 blocks access to the courts
While the battle rages in Brussels, France has chosen to pre-empt the regulation by attacking not the content of the law, but its practical accessibility. This is a classic neoliberal technique: not prohibiting the law, but making it almost impossible to exercise.
Adopted in the middle of summer, on 5 August 2025, Decree No. 2025-772 reorganises the procedure applicable to small claims relating to air travel. Under the guise of “simplification” and reducing the backlog in the courts, this text makes it much more complex and costly for passengers to take legal action against airlines on French soil. From February 2026, when the new procedures come into force, the obstacle course faced by aggrieved passengers will become virtually insurmountable for the average person.
Until now, a simple written complaint to the airline, either directly or via passenger assistance websites, was often enough to obtain a refund or compensation. But if this amicable approach failed, passengers could still take their case to court free of charge by filing a claim with the court registry, without the need for a bailiff or lawyer. From now on, for aviation disputes, this route is closed: it will first be necessary to go through mandatory mediation, then have a summons issued by a judicial officer, often with the help of a lawyer, even for amounts between €250 and €600.
Various practitioners estimate that unavoidable costs (service of process, deposits, etc.), excluding lawyers’ fees, can amount to several hundred euros, making legal action for small amounts economically absurd. Who is going to incur €300 or €400 in costs in the hope of recovering €250? Very few people. The French government, complicit in this new European social setback, has thus erected a financial and procedural barrier to entering the court! This is tantamount to a denial of justice, which once again affects the most vulnerable.
A class struggle at the airport
It is time to debunk the myth that air travel promotes equality. The current reform is not neutral: it is socially targeted. Studies conducted by BEUC and consumer associations estimate that with the new thresholds proposed by the Council and the combination of national procedural barriers, up to 75% of passengers currently eligible could be excluded from the right to compensation. Who are these 75%? They are not business travellers in business class, whose flexible tickets are managed by legal services and specialised agencies, but families, students and precarious workers who use low-cost airlines to travel across Europe.
The typical victim of this reform is a passenger on a short- or medium-haul intra-European flight (Ryanair, easyJet, Wizz Air, etc.) who is exposed to delays of 3 or 4 hours. For them, the €250 compensation is not a bonus, but often the reimbursement of the entire ticket price, or even more.
Beyond the laws, there is everyday practice. Companies have developed what could be called a “battle of ignorance”: digital forms that are impossible to find, opaque interfaces where complaints get lost, ground staff who are poorly trained or give vague information, and outsourcing of disputes to platforms that are difficult to understand. Everything is done to make passengers give up.
Today, several studies estimate that only 10 to 20% of eligible passengers complete the compensation process. With European reform and tougher recourse procedures, this rate could fall to less than 5%, which would significantly increase the “forfeiture rate” already factored into airlines’ business models. This is money that should go back to consumers, but instead remains in the coffers of transport companies.
The green scam: ecology as a pretext
This is undoubtedly one of the most cynical aspects of aviation lobbying. Airlines have found the perfect excuse to further limit compensation: “it’s for the planet”. Their reasoning is simple: the ecological transition (sustainable fuels, fleet renewal) would cost billions, so the money spent on compensating for delays could no longer be invested in decarbonisation. Under this pressure, they present governments with a false dilemma: “either we reimburse passengers or we green our fleet, we can’t do both”.
This is social greenwashing: the same companies are asking the European Union to provide massive support for their transition through public funding or other measures, while at the same time advocating for a relaxation of Regulation 261/2004 that would reduce their obligations towards passengers. The reality is that several large groups have returned to very comfortable profits, which shows that they could both invest in the transition and respect their customers. It is simply more profitable to use ecology as a shield to protect their margins rather than as a genuine moral obligation.
2026, a pivotal year for air passenger rights
In this quasi-secret battle being fought within the European institutions, 2026 will be a pivotal year: trilogues between the Council, Parliament and Commission will determine whether Parliament’s protective stance prevails or whether the rollback sought by Member States and lobbies wins out. If the EU Council’s text is adopted as it stands, and if the French decree is not challenged, flying will become a gamble where, in the event of a problem, passengers will be left to face all-powerful multinationals on their own.
Faced with this neoliberal offensive, the response must be political and civic-minded. It is not just a matter of defending consumers, but of reaffirming the primacy of law over economic power. Associations are calling for automatic compensation (without any action on the part of the passenger), dissuasive penalties for failure to provide information, and simplified and truly accessible class actions. The challenge is to protect the rights of air passengers in the long term through an inalienable right to assistance and compensation, financed by the sector’s profits, ensuring that freedom of movement is not a luxury reserved for those who can afford lawyers. The battle is secret, but it is urgent that it be fought in the open.
FAQ: Your passenger rights in 2026 in light of the reform
How do I make a claim for a delayed flight under the new rules?
For the time being, European case law maintains the compensation threshold at 3 hours' delay on arrival. However, if the EU Council's reform is passed, your delayed flight claim will only be valid from 5 hours (or 9 hours for long-haul flights). It is therefore crucial to keep all your evidence (photos of the departure board, tickets) and to file your claim as soon as possible before the potentially more restrictive new thresholds come into force.
What is the difference between compensation and reimbursement for a flight ticket?
Do not confuse the two. A flight refund is due if your flight is cancelled and you are not re-routed, or if the delay exceeds 5 hours and you decide not to travel. Compensation (€250 to €600) is compensation for the loss of time. Please note: airlines often try to offer you a voucher instead of a cash refund. Refuse it if you prefer a bank transfer; it is your right.
The company refuses to pay. Is it necessary to refer the matter to the ombudsman?
Yes, and that's where the French trap closes in. With Decree No. 2025-772, you can no longer take your case directly to the local court. You must first attempt to reach an amicable resolution, i.e. refer the matter to the tourism and travel mediator (or that of the company). This step lengthens the process. Only if this mediation fails can you consider legal action, which is now more complex.
Sources:
- European Parliament – Air passengers should keep their rights, say MEPs
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20251218IPR32269/air-passengers-should-keep-their-rights-say-meps - European Parliament Research Service – Revising air passenger rights: Where do we stand?
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2026)782609[2] - European Commission / Your Europe – Air passenger rights (EU 261/2004)
https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights/air/index_fr.htm - BEUC – The revision of the air passenger rights regulation
https://www.beuc.eu/sites/default/files/publications/BEUC-X-2025-021_The_revision_of_the_air_passenger_rights_regulation.pdf - BEUC – Air Passenger Rights back on the negotiation table – Factsheet
https://www.beuc.eu/sites/default/files/publications/BEUC-X-2025-022_Air_Passenger_Rights_factsheet.pdf - UFC-Que Choisir / CLCV & partners – 75% of passengers would be excluded from the right to compensation
https://www.quechoisir.org/action-ufc-que-choisir-revision-des-droits-des-passagers-aeriens-75-des-passagers-seraient-exclus-du-droit-a-indemnisation-n116015/ - EU Council / Industry – Joint Industry Position – EU261 revision (Airlines for Europe, ERAA, etc.)
https://www.eraa.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Joint-Industry-Position-EU261-revision_15102025.pdf - Eurochambres – Position on the revision of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation
https://www.eurochambres.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/250917-Eurochambres-position-on-the-revision-of-the-Air-Passenger-Rights-Regulation.pdf - French Government – Decree No. 2025-772 of 5 August 2025 on the procedure applicable to certain disputes
https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/jorf/id/JORFTEXT000052052454 - National Assembly – Written question Air
passenger rightshttps://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/dyn/17/questions/QANR5L17QE12118 - Europe-consumers / CEC France-Germany – Air travel: air
passenger rights https://www.europe-consommateurs.eu/tourisme-transports/voyage-en-avion/voyager-en-avion.html - Euronews – EU lawmakers uphold three-hour delay compensation for air passengers
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2025/10/14/eu-lawmakers-to-maintain-the-three-hour-delay-passengers-rights - AA / Anadolu Agency – European Parliament pushes for 3-hour flight delay compensation, free cabin bag
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/european-parliament-pushes-for-3-hour-flight-delay-compensation-free-personal-item-onboard/3716249 - Legal News – Air passenger compensation: what will change in 2026
https://www.actu-juridique.fr/transports-aeriens/indemnisation-des-passagers-aeriens-ce-qui-changera-en-2026/ - Service-public.fr – Air travel: delayed flight
https://www.service-public.gouv.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F10977
