What changed between the adopted text of 21 Jan 2026 and the adopted text of 7 Jul 2026

Removed:(18a) Where a passenger cancels a flight, air carriers should be obliged to refund, free of charge, taxes which have already been paid. [Am. 15]

Removed:(19) Airport managing bodies at airports that handle more than fivewith an annual passenger traffic volume of not less than four million passengers per year,for at least three consecutive years and airport essential service providers, in particular air carriers and the suppliers of ground handling services, navigation service providers and assistance providers for disabled passengers and passengers with reduced mobility, should cooperatetake adequate measures to ensure coordination and cooperation between airport users in order to minimise the impact of multiple flight disruptions on passengers. To this end, airport managing bodies should prepareensure adequate coordination by means of proper contingency plans for such occurrences and work together with national, regional or local authorities in the development of such plans. At all other airports, the airport managing bodySuch plans should make all reasonable efforts to coordinate and make arrangements with airport users in situations that could lead to a considerable number of passengers being stranded and to keep the stranded passengers informedbe assessed and, where necessary, adapted by the National Enforcement Bodies. [Am. 16]

Removed:(19a) Air carriers should set up procedures and coordinated action in order to provide adequate information to stranded passengers. Those procedures should clearly indicate who is responsible at each airport for arranging the care, assistance, re-routing or reimbursement and should set out the processes and conditions for the provision of those services. [Am. 17]

Removed:(19b) In order to assist passengers in the case of flight disruptions or delayed, damaged or lost baggage, air carriers should set up contact points at airports where their personnel or third parties commissioned by them should provide passengers with the necessary information regarding their rights, including complaint procedures, and assist them to take immediate action. [Am. 18]

Removed:(19c) Given the short deadlines for the submission of complaints for delayed, damaged or lost baggage, a special baggage claim service should be set up at all airports where passengers have the possibility to submit a complaint upon arrival. For this purpose, air carriers should provide a complaint form in all official languages of the Union to passengers. This could also take the form of the common Property Irregularity Report (PIR). In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission to lay down the form of the standardised claim form through implementing acts. [Am. 19]

Removed:(20) The objective of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 should explicitly include the right to compensation foris to strengthen the rights of consumers by ensuring a high level of protection for air passengers experiencing long delays, in accordance with the judgmentwithin the internal market, in line with Article 38 of the Court of JusticeCharter of Fundamental Rights. In joined Cases C-402/07 (Christopher Sturgeon, Gabriel Sturgeon and Alana Sturgeon v Condor Flugdienst GmbH) and C-432/07 (Stefan Böck and Cornelia Lepuschitz v Air France SA) (‘“judgment in Joined cases C-402/07 and C-432/07’), the Court of Justice reflected this objective by recognizing that passengers experiencing flight delays of three hours or more suffer damage in the form of irreversible loss of time that must be compensated promptly and in a standardized manner. Relying on the principle of equal treatment, the Court confirmed that such long delays cause harm comparable to cancellations and that a difference in treatment could not be objectively justified. Specifically, the Court considered that, when the delay in arrival of a flight is equal to, or in excess of, three hours, the passengers concerned are entitled to compensation, like passengers whose original flight has been cancelled and to whom an air carrier is not able to offer re-routing in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 5(1)(c)(iii) of the regulation, that is, on a flight which departs no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure and reaches their final destination less than two hours after the scheduled time of arrival. In line with the principle of equal treatment referred to in that judgment, the same rules should apply for reimbursement, rerouting and, such compensation rights should also extend to passengers whose flights have not been cancelled but who suffer an equivalent loss of time due to the flight being both brought forward before departure and subject to a delay at arrival. Accordingly, in order to maintain robust safeguards for passengers in line with Article 38 of the Charter, as well as to ensure uniform protection, legal certainty and effective enforcement across Member States, Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 should explicitly set out a common three-hour threshold for compensation where passengers suffer an irreversible loss of time that is equal to or exceeds three hours in relation to the duration originally planned by the air carrier. [Am. 20]

Removed:(21) The judgment in joined Cases C-402/07 and C-432/07 referred to a one-trigger time threshold of three hours for compensation in cases of delay. However, experience gained since the adoption of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 shows that many delays cannot be resolved within the three hours referred to in that judgment and that a short threshold may increase the number of flight cancellations where air carriers reduce the knock-on effects of delayed flights on the subsequent flights by cancelling one or several flights to reposition the aircraft for a next flight. In most circumstances, the passenger would still prefer a delay over a cancellation because the passenger has more certainty as to the arrival at the relevant destination at the earliest opportunity. On many routes, the frequency of flights is limited, and, in cases of cancellation, the passenger cannot be immediately rerouted. Increasing the time threshold therefore presents an advantage for the passenger. [Am. 21]

Removed:(22) With a view to maintaining connectivity, the thresholds above which delays give rise to a right to compensation should be increased to take account of the financial and competitiveness impact on the sector. In this way, it will be possible to avoid incentivising any increase in the frequency of cancellations or restrictions in the number of routes operated or reductions in connectivity offered to passengers in the long term. To ensure that passengers travelling within the Union face homogenous conditions for compensation, the threshold should be the same for all travel within the Union. [Am. 22]

Removed:(23) The standardised compensation in Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 serves to compensate for a loss of time which is common to all passengers. The amounts fixed in Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 could, in many cases, go beyond the value of the damage incurred by passengers as established by economic studies. It is therefore appropriate to define different thresholds for compensation levels according to the distance of the flight disrupted and the delay at arrival. [Am. 23]

Removed:(24) In accordance with the Union’s efforts to promote climate-neutral and environmentally friendly mobility, it is also appropriate to ensure that regulatory frameworks for passenger rights of transport modes converge to the extent possible and that the compensation provided between different modes of transport is levelled. [Am. 24]

Removed:(24a) The Flight Emissions Label established pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 2023/2405 of the European Parliament and the Council is at the disposal of the service providers should they want to display, in an easily accessible format on their websites and on tickets, accurate and objective information regarding the environmental impact of their travel in a comparable way. [Am. 25]

Removed:(25) To ensure legal certainty, Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 should explicitly confirm that the changing of flight schedules has a similar impact on passengers to cancellations or, delays or denied boarding and should therefore give rise to the same rights. [Am. 26]

Removed:(26) Passengers who miss a connecting flight which is part of a journey as a result of a disruption, a change of schedule or a delay on a previous flight should be properly assisted while waiting for rerouting. In such cases, in accordance with the principle of equal treatment and with the judgement of the Court of Justice in Case C-11/11 (Air France v. Folkerts), passengers should be entitled to compensation upon reaching the final destination of their alternative flight or transportation, on a similar basis to passengers experiencing disruptions on direct flights in light of the delay upon reaching the final destination of their journey. [Am. 27]

Removed:(27) At the time of booking and prior the purchase of the tickets, air carriers, or, where appropriate, the intermediaries, should clearly inform passengers whether their travel plans would be covered by a single air transport contract and of their rights under Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, particularly regarding missed connecting flights.

Removed:(28) In order to enhance passenger protection, it should be clarified that passengers whose flight was delayed should benefit from rights to assistance and compensation irrespective of whether they are waiting in the airport terminal or are already seated on board the aircraft. However, as the latter have no access to the services available in the terminal, their rights should be reinforced with regard to basic needs and with regard to the right to disembark. The right to disembark may only be limited if there are safety, immigration, air traffic control or security-related reasons. If an air carrier is about to disembark passengers but is informed by air traffic control authorities that the flight is authorised to take-off imminently, it should be allowed to decline to disembark passengers.

Removed:(29) Where a passenger has opted for rerouting at the earliest opportunity, the air carrier often makes the rerouting conditional upon the availability of seats on its own services, thereby denying its passengers the option of being rerouted more quickly by alternative services. Therefore, the carrier should also propose other options for rerouting, including to an alternative airport, by a different route, on another carrier’s services or on other transport modes where this can speed up rerouting. Alternative rerouting should be dependent upon the availability of seats. If the air carrier has not offered a rerouting and the cumulated waiting time is prolonged by at least three hours, the passenger should have the right to arrange his or her own rerouting in order to reach his or her final destination without further delay. That rerouting should be, subject to certain conditions, at the air carrier’s expenses and provided under comparable transport conditions. [Am. 28]

Removed:(30) When rerouting passengers, air carriers should seek to ensure that passengers can travel with their baggage, including checked and unchecked baggage. An air carrier should be allowed by the passenger to proceed otherwise if restrictions on baggage transportation could cause further delays to passengers awaiting rerouting, without prejudice to its liability in respect of passengers’ baggage governed by Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 and by the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage by Air, agreed at Montreal on 28 May 1999 (‘the Montreal Convention’).

Removed:(31) Whether transport conditions are comparable could depend on a number of factors and on the particular circumstances. Where possible and where it does not entail further delay, passengers should not be downgraded to transport services of a lower class compared with the one on the reservation. Rerouting should be offered at no additional cost to the passenger, even if passengers are rerouted with another air carrier or on a different transport mode or in a higher class or at a higher fare than the one paid for the original service. Reasonable efforts should be made to avoid additional connections. When using another air carrier or an alternative mode of transport for rerouting, Persons with disabilities or persons with reduced mobility should not be subject to any additional connecting flight when rerouted, unless otherwise agreed by the passenger. The total travel time should be as close as reasonably possible to the scheduled travel time of the original flight, taking into account the options available at the airport where the disruption occurred, in the same class of transport or a higher one if necessary. If several flights are available with comparable timings, passengers having the right to rerouting should accept the offer of rerouting made by the air carrier, including on those air carriers cooperating with the operating air carrier. If the operating air carrier provides the passenger with rerouting under comparable transport conditions the passenger should accept such rerouting. If the operating air carrier provides the passenger with rerouting options which are not under comparable transport conditions, the passenger could refuse such rerouting. The right to rerouting, including self-rerouting should be maintained. If assistance for persons with disabilities or persons with reduced mobility was booked for the original flight, such assistance should also be available on the alternative route in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council. [Am. 29]

Removed:(31a) Where a passenger informed the operating air carrier of his or her choice to continue his or her journey, and if the operating air carrier has not offered within three hours a rerouting, the passenger should have the right to arrange his or her own rerouting under comparable transport conditions in order to reach his or her final destination without further delay. However, the passenger should remain entitled to rerouting by the operating air carrier until the passenger has informed the operating air carrier of his or her decision, to arrange his or her own rerouting. When arranging their own rerouting, the passengers should limit the expenses to those that are necessary, reasonable and appropriate. [Am. 30]

Removed:(31b) Assistance could be limited or declined if its provision would itself cause further delay to passengers awaiting a delayed flight or the rerouting. If a flight is delayed late in the evening but can be expected to depart within a short period of time and if dispatching passengers to hotels and bringing them back to the airport in the middle of the night could lead to a much longer delay, the air carrier should be allowed to decline to provide hotel accommodation and corresponding transfers. Similarly, if an air carrier is about to provide food and drinks but is informed that the flight is ready for boarding, it should be allowed to decline to provide this assistance. Apart from these cases, this limitation should be applied only in very exceptional cases, as every effort should be made to reduce the inconvenience suffered by passengers. [Am. 31]

Removed:(32) Air carriers should offer assistance to passengers from the scheduled time of departure until the departure of their flight or alternative transportation. Air carriers currently face unlimited liability for the accommodation of their passengers in the case where the extraordinary circumstances persist for a long period of time. This uncertainty linked with the absence of any foreseeable limit in time may risk endangering a carrier’s financial stability, with consequential negative effects for passengers in terms of connectivity. An air carrier should therefore be able to limit the provision of care as regards the duration of accommodation and, in cases where passengers arrange the accommodation themselves, as regards costs and care to three nights. Moreover, contingency planning and speedy rerouting should lessen the risk of passengers being stranded for long periods. [Am. 32]

Removed:(33) Passengers with specific needs such as persons with disabilities, persons with reduced mobility, unaccompanied children, infants, pregnant women and persons in need of specific medical assistance such as people with severe diabetes or epilepsy, may require specific attention by the operating air carrier. In particular, it may be more difficult to arrange accommodation when flight disruptions occur. Therefore, any limitations on the right to be provided with accommodation in cases of extraordinary circumstances should noton no account apply to these categories of passenger provided they have informed the operating air carrier in due time. [Am. 33]

Removed:(33a) The service providers should ensure that persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility have the right, at all times, to use safety-approved respiratory devices on aircraft, free of charge. The Commission should draw up a list of approved medical oxygen equipment in cooperation with the industry and organisations representing persons with disabilities and persons with reduces mobility, taking due account of safety requirements. [Am. 34]

Removed:(34) Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 also applies to passengers who have booked their air transport as part of a package travel. This amending Regulation aims to further improve the coherence between Directive (EU) 2015/2302 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EC) No 261/2004. In that regard, passengers should be able to choose under which of those two legal acts they introduce their claims and, where appropriate, make claims under both legal acts. A passenger who has booked air transport as part of a package should be able to make claims under both legal acts where, for example, the passenger received a compensation from the air carrier for a delayed flight, but is entitled to a price reduction or compensation to be granted by the organiser for specific services, such as a hotel night, meals, an excursion or other events, missed as a consequence of the delayed flight. However, passengers should not be allowed to cumulate corresponding rights, in particular insofar as the relevant compensation or price reduction granted under both legal acts safeguards the same interest or have the same objective. If passengers introduce their claim with the air carrier, the air carrier should pay the full amount of the compensation due under Regulation (EC) No 261/2004. If passengers make a claim under Directive (EU) 2015/2302, the compensation paid by the air carrier should be deducted from payments due under Directive (EU) 2015/2302 insofar as the underlying rights safeguard the same interest or have the same objective. [Am. 35]

Removed:(35) The reasons for the current level of delays and cancelled flights in the Union are not attributable solely to air carriers. In order to incentivise all actors in the aviation chain to seek efficient and timely solutions to minimise the inconvenience that delays and cancellations cause to passengers, the right of air carriers to seek redress from any third party which contributed to the event triggering compensation or other obligations should not be restricted by Regulation (EC) No 261/2004.

Removed:(36) In its judgment in Case C‑502/18 (CS and Others v České aerolinie a.s.) on the interpretation of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, the Court of Justice held that, in the case of connecting flights, within the scope of that Regulation, any operating air carrier which participated in the performance of at least one of those connecting flights is liable to compensate the passenger under that Regulation whether or not the flight which that air carrier operated was disrupted. Even if Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 provides that operating carriers fulfilling duties under it may seek compensation from any third party, the Study has shown poor effectiveness of the right of redress provided for in that Regulation. As a result, Union air carriers bear a disproportionate financial burden compared to third country air carriers. With a view to restoring Union air carriers’ competitiveness in accordance with the recommendations of the report entitled ‘Future of European competitiveness’ of September 2024 (‘Draghi report’), and to maintaining, in the long run, connectivity, the revision of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 should therefore limit the liability of an air carrier to the flights it operates as operating air carrier. [Am. 36]

Removed:(37) Regulation (EC) No 2111/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council requires the air carriage contractor to inform the passenger of the identity of the operating air carrier and Council Directive 93/13/EEC requires the seller or supplier to provide information to the consumer on the terms and conditions of the contract. Passengers should be informed in more detail about their rights in cases of flight disruption, and should also be adequately informed about the cause of the disruption itself, as soon as the information becomes available. That information should also be provided by the air carrier where the passenger has acquired the ticket through an intermediary established in the Union. That information should, at a minimum, be provided by the air carrier or the intermediary in an accessible format and, where appropriate, through so-called ‘push’ notifications from mobile applications or by other digital means. [Am. 37]

Removed:(38) In order to ensure better enforcement of passenger rights, the national enforcement bodies should monitor the enforcement of Regulation (EC) No 261/ 2004 and decide on appropriate sanctions to incentivise compliance with that Regulation. [Am. 38]

Removed:(38a) The Special Report 15/2021 of the European Court of Auditors concluded that national enforcement bodies lack a good overview of operators’ compliance with passenger rights. The Commission in its evaluations also concluded that the overall approach of national enforcement bodies toward monitoring the implementation of the Regulations varies significantly: while some national enforcement bodies tend to be very proactive, others seem only to react to complaints which they receive. To address these shortcomings and to ensure better enforcement of passenger rights, enforcement mechanisms should be strengthened by granting national enforcement bodies independence, establishing a cross-border cooperation mechanism, enhancing their power to obtain information from carriers, and implementing a more effective penalty regime. [Am. 39]

Removed:(39) In order to ensure better enforcement of passenger rights, Member States should ensure that consumers have access to mechanisms for an out-of-court resolution of disputes after those consumers have unsuccessfully complained or submitted a request to the air carrier or the intermediary. Those mechanisms should be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to determine whether The participation of the air carriers orand intermediaries under the scope of this Regulation in alternative dispute resolution procedures should be mandatory and their decisions binding. [Am. 40]

Removed:(39a) As commercial aviation is an integrated Union market, measures to guarantee enforcement of this Regulation should be more effective at Union level with increased involvement of the Commission. Specifically, the Commission should increase public awareness of compliance by air carriers with passenger rights requirements by publishing a list of carriers that systematically fail to comply with this Regulation. [Am. 41]

Removed:(40) When passengers choose to be reimbursed as opposed to being rerouted, they should be automatically reimbursed, in a timely manner, without an obligation to submit a dedicated request.

Removed:(41) Passengers should be adequately informed by the air carrier or the intermediary about the relevant procedures for submitting requests for compensation and complaints to air carriers or the intermediaries and should receive a reply from the air carriers or the intermediaries within a timely manner. Where the airport managing body activates its airport contingency plan, deadlines for replying could be extended.

Removed:(42) Passengers should also have the option to submit individual disputes to a body or bodies responsible for the out-of-court resolution of disputes following complaints to the air carrier. However, since the right to an effective remedy before a tribunal is a fundamental right recognised in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, those measures should neither prevent nor hinder passengers’ access to courts.

Removed:(43) In order to enable passengers to exercise their rights regarding requests, complaints and individual disputes, passengers should be able to directly and personally make an application to the air carriers, intermediaries, or the relevant bodies under Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, in a clear and accessible manner.

Removed:(44) Having regard to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and in order to ensure that the damage to, destruction or loss of mobility equipment or the injury to or death of a recognised assistance dog is compensated to its full replacement cost, air carriers should offer to persons with disabilities and persons with reduced mobility, as defined in Regulation (EC) No 1107/2006, the opportunity to make a special declaration of interest free of charge, which pursuant to the Montreal Convention allows them to seek full compensation for loss or damage. Air carriers should inform passengers of that declaration and of the related rights whenever they make a ticket booking. [Am. 42]

Removed:(45) The person with disabilities and the person with reduced mobility should be entitled to immediately receive a temporary replacement of mobility equipment from the air carrier to replace checked mobility equipment in the case of loss of, destruction or damage to the checked mobility equipment. Given that recognised assistance dogs cannot be easily replaced, other temporary solutions should be provided where a recognised assistance dog is lost, dies or is injured.

Removed:(46) It is not always clear toRegulation (EC) No 261/2004 should ensure its objective of raising standards of protection and of information for passengers which baggage they are allowed to take on board an aircraft, in terms of dimensions, weight or number of items permitted. In order to ensure that passengers are fully aware of the baggage allowances included in, strengthening their ticket, both for unchecked and checked baggage,rights and ensuring that air carriers should clearly indicate these allowances at booking and at the airport. In order to ensure sufficient personal comfort during passengers’ travel, and as recognised byoperate under harmonised conditions, including hand baggage dimensions. In accordance with the judgement of the Court of Justice in its judgment in case C‑487/12 (Vueling-487/12(Vueling Airlines SA v Instituto Galego de Consumo de la Xunta de Galicia Vueling), passengershand baggage (i.e. baggage that is not checked in) should be allowed to take personal itemsconsidered as constituting a ‘necessary aspect of their carriage into the cabin at no cost, provided that the personal items comply with applicable safety and security requirements and meet reasonable requirements in terms of weight and dimensions. Personal items constituting a necessary aspect’ of the carriage of passengers are understood to be those items that are essential for the duration of the journey and may include passports and other travel documentson condition that such baggage meets ‘reasonable requirements’ in terms of its weight and dimensions, essential medicines, personal devices and reading materials as well as food and beverage appropriate to the duration of the flight and that its carriage should not, therefore, be made subject to a price supplement. Airlines should also communicate carry-on baggage dimensions clearly to passengers. [Am. 43]

Removed:(46a) Greater clarity should be provided where a personal item or hand baggage is left behind or lost in the aircraft cabin in order to facilitate the handling of such requests, ensuring a streamlined process and preventing any additional burden or miscommunication for passengers. [Am. 44]

Removed:(47) Passengers should be informed at booking, in clear and accessible format, of the maximum dimensions and weight of the baggage they can bring with them in the cabin. Without prejudice to the freedom of pricing principle, air carriers should define a reasonable policy in terms of dimensions of hand baggage which enables passengers to take a piece of hand baggage into the cabin, provided that it complies with applicable safety and security requirements. Given the diversity of the air carriers’ policies, it is appropriate that in the review of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council, the feasibility of setting up uniform minimal rules for hand baggage should be assessed. [Am. 45]

Removed:(48) Musical instruments can be of immense monetary, artistic and historical value. Moreover, musical instruments are the tools of musicians’ trade used regularly for rehearsal and performance and cannot be easily replaced. Therefore, passengers should be entitled to carry musical instruments into the cabin under their own responsibility, provided those instruments respect capacity, safety and security rules and the air carrier’s maximum baggage allowance policy. In order to allow the passengers concerned to assess whether their musical instrument can be stored in the cabin, air carriers should inform them about the size of storage facilities. When capacity, safety and security requirements are fulfilled, the air carrier should endeavour to allow passengers to carry musical instruments on additional seats, provided that the corresponding fares have been paid. Where this is not possible, musical instruments should, where possible, be carried under the appropriate conditions in the cargo compartment of the aircraft. Therefore, Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 should be amended accordingly. [Am. 46]

Removed:(49) Given the short deadlines for the submission of complaints for the rights and obligations covered by Regulation (EC) No 2027/97, air carriers should provide passengers with the possibility to submit a complaint by providing them with a complaint form in formats which are accessible to persons with disabilities and persons who do not use digital tools. Air carriers should, at a minimum, make the complaint form available on the air carriers’ mobile applications and on their websites. That complaint form should allow the passenger to immediately file a complaint about damaged, delayed or lost baggage.

Removed:(50) Article 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 has become obsolete as insurance matters are now regulated by Regulation (EC) No 785/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council. It should therefore be deleted.

Removed:(51) It is necessary that the monetary limits referred to in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2027/97 be regularly amended by air carriers in order to take into account economic developments, as reviewed by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) pursuant to Article 24(2) of the Montreal Convention. [Am. 47]

Removed:(52) The Draghi report emphasised the critical role of transport for Union competitiveness. It also outlined the risk of business diversion, resulting from asymmetric regulations, from transport hubs in the Union to hubs in the Union’s neighbourhood. Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 applies to passengers departing from an airport located in a third country to an airport situated in the territory of a Member State to which the Treaties apply, only if the operating air carrier of the flight concerned is a Union air carrier. Within three years of the application of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, the Commission should assess the feasibility of revisingThese findings support the Union legislator's decision to revise the scope of thatthis Regulation with a view to further enhancing the level of passengers’ protection and the level playing field between Union and third country air carriers. [Am. 48]

Removed:(53) A mechanism to safeguardThe financial protection of passengers in the event of airline failure is a key component of an effective passenger rights regime. In order to strengthen air passengers’ protection in the event of cancellations of flights due to theair carrier insolvency of an air carrier or the suspension of an air carrier’s operations due to the revocation of its operating licence, air carriers should be assessed in the context of the revision of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008obliged to provide sufficient evidence of security for the reimbursement of passengers or their repatriation. [Am. 49]

Removed:(53a) The creation of a guarantee fund or a compulsory insurance scheme should for example enable air carriers to ensure that passengers can be reimbursed or repatriated when their flights are cancelled due to the insolvency of an air carrier or the suspension of its operations as the result of the revocation of its operating licence. [Am. 50]

Removed:(54) Greenland is subject to particularly harsh meteorological conditions, and is characterised by very low population density and the remoteness of its populated places. To ensure connectivity and to maintain the availability of flights within Greenland, flights within Greenland should not be covered by the obligations regarding compensation, including where those flights are connecting flights which arrive at or depart from the territory of a Member State to which the Treaties apply. [Am. 51]

Removed:(55) Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 should be without prejudice to the status of and sovereignty over the isthmus of Gibraltar in which the airport of Gibraltar is located and the legal position of the Kingdom of Spain in that regard. Taking into account the current circumstances and in order to provide legal certainty, it should be specified that the rules in Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 should only apply to Gibraltar airport when, following a settlement of the dispute between the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom, the Kingdom of Spain is in a position to exercise effective control over the airport of Gibraltar and to ensure the application of the rules set out in Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 to that airport and a notification of the resolution of the dispute has been published in the Official Journal of the European Union. [Am. 52]

Removed:(55a) This Regulation respects fundamental rights and observe the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, notably consumer protection, the right to protection of personal data, the prohibition of any form of discrimination and the integration of persons with disabilities, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial. [Am. 53]

Removed:(55b) In order to improve air passenger protection beyond Union borders, such rights should also be addressed in bilateral and international agreements. [Am. 54]

Removed:(55c) Specific facilities for severely disabled passengers requiring changing and toilet facilities (so-called 'changing places') should be provided at no cost to the passenger at all Union airports with an annual passenger traffic volume of more than one million passengers. [Am. 55]

Removed:(56) Since the objectives of this Regulation, namely protecting air passenger rights in a fair and balanced manner, ensuring the competitiveness of the Union’s aviation sector and maintaining connectivity for passengers in the long term, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States but can rather, by reason of its scale, be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives,

Removed:HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Removed:Article 1

Removed:Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 is amended as follows:

Removed:(1) Article 1 is replaced by the following:

Removed:‘Article 1 Subject matter

Removed:This Regulation establishes, under the conditions specified herein, minimum rights for air passengers in the event that:

Removed:(a) they are denied boarding;