Languages: German / English / Italian
The new Berlin Brandenburg Airport (BER) looks set to open its gates on 31 October 2020. Even if BER opens as currently scheduled, the public damage caused by its troubled history will remain. It remains to be seen how the numerous delays have harmed the original idea for the airport given the fact that its infrastructure has already become a bit outdated without ever having been used.
The Federal Court of Justice recently issued a verdict stating that compensation under the EU Flight Delay Compensation Regulation must be offset against compensation claims made under national law that were caused by the same incident. The court's judgment is welcomed, as it prevents passengers from being overcompensated and provides greater legal certainty while balancing the interests of airlines and customers.
Recent reports suggest that the need to remedy defects in a faulty fire prevention system and other construction faults will further delay the opening of the new Berlin Brandenburg International Airport. For example, an internal report by TÜV Rheinland detailed 11,519 deficiencies in the airport's emergency lighting and safety power supply cables, which were replaced after the failed opening in 2012.
Following Bavaria's state elections in October 2018, the legally binding plans to build a third runway at Munich Airport incurred significant delays. The state authorities recently agreed that the project will be suspended for five years, despite the fact that demand for aviation services in Munich – and internationally – continues to rise. The decision is a further example of how Germany's aviation industry will face additional, severe obstacles and challenges over the coming years.
The Second Chamber of the First Senate of the Federal Constitutional Court recently rejected three constitutional complaints for adjudication against the Federal Administrative Court's decision concerning night flight regulations affecting Berlin Schoenefeld Airport. In its decisions, the Federal Constitutional Court appropriately weighed the legal interests of affected property owners with those of the general public.
The Federal Constitutional Court recently rejected four constitutional complaints for adjudication against a decision concerning Berlin-Schoenefeld Airport. Following a deviation from the airport's originally envisaged flight routes, the plaintiffs had sought an annulment of the original plan approval order. The court held that the difference between the planning procedures for the airport expansion and the determination of the flight routes raised no constitutional concerns.
A recent non-binding referendum asked Berlin citizens whether they should demand that the Senate give up its closure intentions and take all measures necessary to ensure the indefinite operation of Berlin Tegel Airport. The vote indicates that approximately 56% of Berliners voted 'yes' and support keeping Tegel open. Local politics must now find a way to deal with Berlin's wish to maintain two airports.
Berlin's new international airport is likely to face further delays due to the insolvency of Dutch engineering group Royal Imtech's German division and problems with the construction of the new roof, which led to an immediate halt in building. Even though construction has resumed, rumours remain that further postponement of the start date for airport operations in mid-2017 will be required due to ongoing difficulties.
The Federal Court of Justice has ruled on the scope of application of the EU Denied Boarding Regulation regarding compensation to passengers in the event of a missed connecting flight. The decision distinguished between instances of denied boarding and cases where a passenger has arrived to check in for a flight after the gate has closed due to a previous delayed flight.
The Federal Court of Justice has ruled on the question of whether a passenger who had booked a 14-day all-inclusive tour could, in the event of a delayed flight, claim compensation from the organizing tour operator under EU Regulation 261/2004. The decision strengthens the notion that the regulation is not applicable where national laws already provide sufficient protection to passengers.
In a 2018 decision, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) clarified the requirements for valid and duly executed insurance risk exclusions for the export of goods, which are of significant practical relevance. The BGH's decision sets strict requirements for the transparent and valid wording of risk exclusion clauses in insurance contracts. Those principles, which have been confirmed within the scope of transport insurance, apply to all insurance sectors.