The regulation on passengers’ rights in the event of flight delays is the subject of a political clash between the European Parliament and the EU Council. An attempt is underway in Brussels to amend the legislation that is now more than 20 years old, which could also call into question its central point: reimbursement for flights arriving three hours late.
The current legislation dates back to 2004 and a first attempt to update it began in 2013, but disagreements between member states blocked the dossier for over a decade. The turning point came only in June 2025, when the EU Council reached a political agreement, formally reopening negotiations with Parliament. The interinstitutional talks restarted in October 2025, but without producing an agreement.
No setbacks over the three hours
Now the European Parliament has approved in plenary with 632 votes in favour, 15 against and 9 abstentions its negotiating position, which aims to counter the governments’ position, approved last summer and which reduces protections for passengers. Strasbourg has chosen a very clear line: we must not reduce the protections that citizens already know. The most sensitive point concerns economic compensation for delays.
For Parliament, the current system must remain valid, i.e. the passenger’s right to request compensation when the flight arrives at its destination with a delay of more than three hours, something which the EU Council instead wants to eliminate for many cases, bringing the threshold to four hours or more for flights up to 3,500 kilometers (and for intra-EU flights) and six hours or more for those over 3,500 kilometres.
The European Chamber’s position also aims to preserve the right to reimbursement or rerouting and compensation in cases of flight cancellation or denied boarding, as well as for delays of more than three hours.
“Our starting point is clear: we want to strengthen, not weaken, passengers’ rights. The three-hour threshold, current compensation levels, pre-filled forms and effective guarantees remain red lines for us”, assured the rapporteur for the Chamber, the Bulgarian MP Andrey Novakov.
Compensations
In addition to “when” the right to compensation is triggered, “how much” also matters. Here Parliament is pushing to maintain amounts considered dissuasive and consistent with the existing system, proposing a range between 300 and 600 euros depending on the distance of the route. However, Parliament recognizes a point that airlines have been asking for for some time: compensation cannot be automatic in every scenario, because there are events that do not depend on the operator.
For this reason, the parliamentary position plans to update and clarify the list of “exceptional circumstances” that exempt the company from payment, including cases such as natural disasters, wars, particularly adverse weather conditions or unexpected labor disputes affecting the carrier, the airport or the air navigation services. Parliament wants this list to be exhaustive and for the Commission to keep it updated, to avoid elastic interpretations that always end up shifting the risk onto the passenger.
Assistance while you wait
Alongside refunds, there is the issue of concrete assistance when you get stuck. The House aims to maintain the obligation for companies to assist passengers even when flights run aground at airports and connections are missed. The position provides that the right remains to receive drinks and refreshments regularly while waiting, a meal after a few hours and, in necessary cases, hotel accommodation. In detail, Parliament indicates drinks every two hours and a meal after three hours of waiting.
Here, however, an element of “order” appears which Parliament justifies with the need for predictability: the overnight stay paid for by the company would be covered for up to a maximum of three nights. The declared objective is to avoid that, in exceptional situations, the costs of accommodation become unlimited and unmanageable, while maintaining a minimum level of protection for those who remain stranded.
Hand luggage
Among the most visible changes for passengers is the issue of baggage in the cabin, which in recent years has become a daily battleground between travelers and companies who all have different rules. Parliament maintains that the right to carry on board a personal item such as a bag, backpack or laptop, together with a small hand baggage, with a maximum overall size of 100 centimeters (combined length, width and height) and a weight of up to seven kilos should be guaranteed, without additional costs. For the European Chamber, the rules must be legible and not transform each step of the journey into an extra item to be paid unexpectedly.
Stop “phantom” costs
Parliament also intervenes on another classic irritant of low-cost transport: the additional tariffs that crop up on elements considered essential or unavoidable. The Transport Commission wants to eliminate extra costs that some passengers have to pay, for example to correct typos in names or for check-in procedures. Furthermore, the MEPs aim to maintain a choice that seems trivial but is not: the passenger should be able to choose between a digital and paper boarding pass, without digitalisation becoming an obligation imposed by the carrier (as established for example now by Ryanair).
Vulnerable passengers
As regards passengers with disabilities or reduced mobility and, more generally, those traveling in more delicate conditions such as pregnant women, people with newborns or children in strollers, Parliament underlines that protection cannot stop at the ticket, because in these cases a poor service has a heavier and often more expensive impact.
For this reason, the proposal provides that, if a vulnerable passenger misses their flight because the airport did not guarantee them the assistance needed to get to the gate on time, they are still entitled to compensation and to be moved to an alternative flight, in addition to the expected assistance (meals, drinks or hotels if needed).
It is a way to prevent those who are more fragile from being trapped in a ricochet of responsibility between the airport and the carrier. Among the additional measures, Parliament calls for priority boarding to be guaranteed and for companions to be able to sit next to vulnerable passengers without additional costs.
Pre-filled forms and simpler procedures
To make protection truly accessible, Parliament insists on simplifying requests for reimbursement and compensation. The idea is to reduce the use of claim agencies, i.e. those companies that assert rights on behalf of the passenger by withholding a percentage.
The proposal provides that, in the event of cancellation or long delay, the company must send a pre-filled form within 48 hours to start the procedure. Furthermore, the traveler would have up to a year to submit the compensation request, a wide window designed to avoid turning rights into a bureaucratic obstacle course.
The differences with the Council
The most important difference between Parliament and Council is the one that really changes the lives of those who fly, and is directly linked to how things are today. Currently, with the rules in force, the reference threshold for requesting compensation is three hours of delay on arrival (except in “exceptional circumstances”), and has become the measure best known by passengers.
Parliament wants to defend this approach and maintain the three-hour threshold, while the EU Council proposes to raise it and make it variable based on distance: four hours or more for flights up to 3,500 kilometers (and for intra-EU flights) and six hours or more for those over 3,500 kilometres.
A clear difference also emerges in the amounts, again compared to the current scheme which provides compensation of up to 600 euros depending on the route. Parliament proposes a range between 300 and 600 euros, while the Council aims for a lower ceiling, between 300 and 500 euros, linked to distance. On the practical front of requests, Parliament wants the pre-completed form to arrive both in the event of cancellation and in the event of a long delay and to be sent within 48 hours. The Council restricts this obligation mainly to cancellations and, in addition, introduces shorter deadlines for passengers, setting a six-month limit for submitting complaints or requests for compensation.
