News from Brussels: Passenger rights are to be expanded

It was a moment that brought palpable relief to the corridors of the European Parliament, while in the boardrooms of the major airlines, calculators were likely being pulled out. With an overwhelming majority of 632 votes, Parliament sent a clear signal on January 21, 2026 : consumer protection in the skies is non-negotiable. For a long time, it seemed as if the existing standards could be weakened by economic interests and pressure from the aviation lobby. But the current vote makes it clear that a reform of the Air Passenger Rights Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004 does not necessarily mean a reduction in rights. As a law firm, we are following this development with great interest, because what is being decided here redefines the boundary between the profit motive of airlines and the legitimate need for protection of every individual passenger.

The conflict of institutions: Commission versus Parliament

The root of the current debate lies in May 2025, when the Transport Commission presented a proposal that raised eyebrows among us and many consumer protection groups. That draft called for a massive increase in the hurdles for compensation claims . Instead of the established three-hour limit for delays, passengers would only be entitled to compensation after four or even six hours . Furthermore, the proposal included plans to reduce some compensation amounts. However, the European Parliament has now sided with passengers. Instead of weakening the rules, MEPs are demanding that the proven time limits be maintained and are even going a step further. We see the Parliament's counter-proposal as an attempt to adapt travelers' rights to the economic realities of today, rather than undermining them through bureaucratic maneuvering.

Technical defects are not a stroke of fate.

A particularly critical point in the negotiations is the definition of so-called " extraordinary circumstances ." In our daily practice, we repeatedly witness airlines attempting to portray technical defects or staff shortages as unavoidable events in order to deny payments. The EU Commission wanted to support precisely this approach and classify technical or crew problems as extraordinary circumstances. This would have been a severe setback for legal certainty. However, Parliament has now clearly rejected these efforts. We expressly welcome this decision, as a technical malfunction of an aircraft lies at the heart of an airline's operations and therefore should not be considered "force majeure" to the detriment of customers. Only genuine natural disasters or unforeseen strikes by third parties should deprive passengers of their entitlement.

Inflation and modernization: More than just the status quo

Interestingly, Parliament is not only safeguarding existing compensation but also proposing proactive improvements. For example, an increase in compensation for short-haul flights from €250 to €300 is under consideration. We consider the proposal to adjust compensation amounts for inflation every three years to be particularly forward-looking. For over two decades, these amounts have remained static while ticket prices and the cost of living have steadily increased. Furthermore, Parliament is calling for greater transparency regarding hand luggage and a drastic acceleration of payment procedures. Requiring compensation payments within seven days would significantly shorten the often months-long legal battles we conduct for our clients.

The path to the mediation committee: What happens next?

Since the Commission, Council, and Parliament have so far been unable to reach an agreement, we are now entering rare political territory: the Conciliation Committee . This is the first time in over ten years that this instrument has been used in the EU. Here, representatives of all 27 member states must find a compromise with the Members of Parliament. However, we would like to point out that the outcome of this procedure is completely open. Should no agreement be reached, the reform will fail entirely for the time being. Paradoxically, this would not be a bad outcome for travelers, as in this case the current legislation, which is quite advantageous for passengers, would remain in place. A poor compromise, on the other hand, would be more disastrous than no agreement at all.

Conclusion of our law firm

In summary, the recent vote by the European Parliament represents a significant milestone for consumer protection. Members of Parliament have recognized that air passenger rights are one of the EU's most tangible success stories and must not be sacrificed on the altar of industry subsidies. However, we remain vigilant: the conciliation committee still offers opportunities for backroom deals. Nevertheless, the direction is clear: the era in which airlines could pass the buck for technical problems onto passengers with impunity appears to be drawing to a close. We will continue to analyze the upcoming negotiations from a legal perspective to ensure that our clients continue to receive their due rights.