An intense year in court
If 2024 was the year of mass disputes over delays and cancellations stemming from the chaotic European summer, 2025 has consolidated the interpretive criteria around the 1999 Montreal Convention. Five rulings in particular are worth keeping on the radar.
Judgment 1 · Spanish Supreme Court, First Chamber, March 2025
The Spanish Supreme Court confirmed that the limitation period under Article 35 (two years) runs from the date of actual arrival of the aircraft at destination, not from the scheduled date. The nuance is relevant in operations involving diversions: the dies a quo shifts, and with it the prescription risk for late claims.
Judgment 2 · CJEU, Case C-447/24
The CJEU clarifies that compensation under Regulation 261/2004 is cumulative with that of the Montreal Convention to the extent that they cover distinguishable damages. Earlier case law had raised concerns over double recovery; the CJEU dispels them with a functional non-equivalence test: Regulation 261 compensates inconvenience, Montreal compensates actual economic damage.
Judgment 3 · Madrid Provincial Court, Section 28, June 2025
The Provincial Court establishes a uniform criterion on the SDRs (Special Drawing Rights) applicable to lost baggage: the limit of 1,288 SDR per passenger is calculated as at the date of the final judgment, not as at the date of the incident. Airlines should recalculate their technical provisioning schedules.
Judgment 4 · German BGH, July 2025
The Bundesgerichtshof accepts, for the first time, the carrier's liability for damages caused by runway blockage arising from a ground-handling strike. The ruling departs from French precedent and potentially opens a new front of cross-border claims.
Judgment 5 · UK Court of Appeal, September 2025
Important for international cargo: the UK Court of Appeal admits the doctrine of "consequential damages" where there is wilful misconduct or recklessness with knowledge of the risk (Article 22.5). The evidentiary threshold is high, but the avenue is now definitively open.
Conclusion
The Convention continues to deliver meaningful interpretive nuances. For operators and insurers, it is worth reviewing technical policies and claim-notification templates in light of these rulings.