Which Airlines Reject the Most EC261 Claims? (And What to Do About It)

Getting your EC261 flight compensation claim rejected can feel like a dead end — but the data tells a very different story. A rejected claim is often just the beginning of a process that ends in passengers getting paid. What the airlines don't advertise is that a large proportion of their initial rejections get overturned the moment a passenger escalates.

This article breaks down exactly which airlines are most likely to reject your claim, what tactics they use, and crucially — what you should do if they say no.

The Scale of the Problem

Flight compensation claims are routinely rejected at the first submission stage. Industry data from law firm Bott and Co (2024) reveals that 46% of compensation claims across various airlines require court proceedings to secure a settlement. That means nearly half of all passengers seeking what they're legally owed have to escalate all the way to a judge before the airline pays up.

The CAA's ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) data reinforces this picture. In the year to October 2025, ADR providers handled 43,238 complaints, of which 32,004 were adjudicated. Among adjudicated cases, 6,875 were awarded in favour of passengers and 17,346 in favour of airlines — with 7,778 cases settled independently. The average uphold rate for consumers was 57%, with a total of £11,222,858 in awards and an average award value of £764 per passenger. (Source: UK Civil Aviation Authority, 2024)

The picture becomes more striking when you look at how many initial rejections are reversed on escalation. Of 10,679 complaints against British Airways escalated to an independent complaint body, 81% were upheld in favour of customers. (Source: BBC News)

If you've been rejected, the odds are increasingly in your favour once you escalate.

Airline-by-Airline: Which Airlines Reject the Most Claims?

No airline is legally required to publish its first-submission rejection rate, so the best proxy available comes from data on the proportion of claims that eventually require court proceedings before an airline pays out. Higher rates indicate airlines that routinely reject valid claims and resist payment until legal pressure is applied.

The following table uses 2024 data from Bott and Co, one of the UK's leading flight compensation law firms:

Airline	Claims Requiring Court Proceedings	Rating
Vueling	84%	⛔ Worst
Lufthansa	76%	🔴 Very Poor
Ryanair	74%	🔴 Very Poor
Wizz Air UK	70%	🔴 Very Poor
KLM	61%	🟠 Poor
Virgin Atlantic	56%	🟠 Poor
British Airways	16%	🟢 Better
Jet2.com	18%	🟢 Better

Source: Bott and Co, 2024

Important caveat: These figures represent claims managed by a law firm and filed in the UK. The proportion needing court proceedings may differ for passengers making direct claims or in other jurisdictions. The data does not represent all EC261 claims globally.

Vueling: 84% of Claims Go to Court

Vueling tops the table — an extraordinary statistic that means for every five passengers who hire a law firm to pursue a claim, four of them end up in court. This is not a marginal problem; it reflects a systematic approach to rejecting or ignoring claims until litigation forces the issue.

Ryanair: 74% and a History of Delay Tactics

Ryanair's 74% court-proceedings rate reflects well-documented resistance to compensation claims. The airline has been accused of misclassifying disruptions as extraordinary circumstances to avoid paying out. In November 2024, Spain's Consumer Rights Ministry fined Ryanair €108 million for "abusive practices" including charging for hand luggage — the largest fine of a €179 million package spread across five budget airlines. (Source: BBC News)

In the year to October 2025, Ryanair paid £1.68 million in compensation to passengers who had initially been rejected or whose claims had not been resolved before escalation to an ADR body. (Source: BBC News)

Wizz Air: 70% and £1.7 Million in Overturned Claims

Wizz Air UK sits at 70% of claims requiring court proceedings, with £1.7 million paid to passengers in the same 12-month ADR period — money that would not have been paid without escalation. Wizz Air's EC261 and UK261 rejection record makes it one of the most challenging airlines to deal with at the first-submission stage.

Lufthansa: 76% — Including Defects Known for Years

Lufthansa's 76% court-proceedings rate is particularly notable given some of the reasoning behind rejected claims. ADR adjudicators in one high-profile British Airways case (which illustrates the broader industry pattern) found that the airline had not "sufficiently demonstrated that there were no reasonable measures it could have taken to avoid the cancellation" — and that the underlying defect was known to the company since at least 2017. (Source: BBC News)

British Airways and EasyJet: The Story Isn't Simple

British Airways has a relatively low court-proceedings rate (16%) but still paid £6.2 million in total compensation via ADR, with a high 83% of escalated complaints decided in favour of passengers. This suggests BA is less likely to require full court proceedings but is still regularly forced to pay after initial rejections.

EasyJet, according to industry experience documented at Flightright, is "notorious for being one of the most difficult airlines" when it comes to paying compensation. Documented tactics include: frequently ignoring compensation requests entirely, maintaining a backlog of unsettled claims, frequently claiming extraordinary circumstances incorrectly, and offering vouchers instead of cash compensation. (Source: Flightright)

Common Rejection Tactics Used by Airlines

Airlines use a surprisingly small toolkit of rejections. Understanding them means you can counter them.

1. "Extraordinary Circumstances" — Even When There Aren't Any

This is the most common rejection tactic. EC261 allows airlines to avoid paying when a flight disruption was caused by extraordinary circumstances beyond their control — think volcanic ash, political unrest, or severe weather. However, airlines routinely misapply this defence.

Courts have repeatedly confirmed that:

• Technical faults are generally not extraordinary circumstances (CJEU case C-549/07, Wallentin-Hermann v Alitalia)
• Routine maintenance issues are not extraordinary circumstances
• Air traffic control issues that were foreseeable may not qualify
• Wildcat strikes were ruled extraordinary in C-195/17 (Krüsemann v TUIfly, 2018), but only when they were truly spontaneous and external

If an airline cites extraordinary circumstances without specifics, challenge them. Ask them to explain exactly what the circumstance was and why it could not have been avoided.

2. Offering Vouchers Instead of Cash

Airlines sometimes offer travel vouchers as "compensation." These are not the same as the cash compensation required under EC261. You are entitled to cash (or direct bank transfer). A voucher can be declined.

3. The Silence Treatment

Some airlines simply don't respond to initial claims. This is not the same as a refusal — but it is a rejection of sorts. Under EC261 interpretative guidelines, the European Commission recommends that airlines reply within 2 months. If they don't, you can escalate immediately.

4. Blaming Another Party

Some airlines attempt to blame ground handlers, airports, or third parties. EC261 makes the operating air carrier responsible, not ground handlers or airports. If your flight was operated by Ryanair, Ryanair is liable — even if part of the problem was outside their direct control.

What to Do After a Rejection

A rejection from the airline is not the end of the road. Here are your four escalation options, in order of speed and cost:

Option 1: Respond Directly — With a Letter Before Action

If you receive a rejection or no response, send a written follow-up citing:

• Your specific flight details and the delay/cancellation
• The exact EC261/2004 articles you are relying on (Article 7 for compensation; Article 5 for cancellations)
• A clear statement that you reject their grounds for refusal
• A 14-day deadline before you escalate to an ADR or NEB

This alone resolves many claims, as airlines are aware that escalation costs them more than paying up.

Option 2: National Enforcement Body (NEB)

Every EU member state has a National Enforcement Body responsible for enforcing EC261. In the UK, that role is now shared between the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and approved ADR providers. You can complain to your national NEB for free.

The UK CAA opened a formal compliance programme in October 2025 to assess the 25 largest airlines flying from the UK — airlines covering 90% of UK passenger volumes — and identify systemic issues. (Source: UK Civil Aviation Authority)

NEBs don't directly pay passengers, but enforcement action puts pressure on airlines and their findings can support your claim.

Option 3: Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

ADR is the fastest and most effective escalation for most passengers. In the UK, approved ADR providers include AviationADR and CEDR. For full timelines on each method, see how long flight compensation takes. Their process is free for passengers; airlines pay the cost of adjudication.

AviationADR targets a 90-day timeframe from receipt of the Complete Complaint File, with most decisions typically delivered within an average span of 30 days. Decisions are binding on the airline if you accept them. (Source: AviationADR.org.uk)

Given that 81% of BA claims escalated to ADR were upheld for passengers, the odds are good.

Option 4: Small Claims Court

If all else fails — or if you want to pursue the claim yourself — the small claims process in the UK (County Court) allows you to file for up to £10,000 at a low cost. Many flight compensation cases are straightforward to file.

Be aware that airlines with high court-proceedings rates (Vueling at 84%, Ryanair at 74%) are known to contest claims robustly. However, passenger win rates in published court data are generally strong when the legal grounds are solid.

Option 5: Use a Claims Management Service

A claims management company (CMC) handles the entire process for you: negotiation with the airline, ADR filing, and court proceedings if necessary. You pay nothing upfront; they take a commission of typically 25–35% of the awarded compensation if successful.

The advantage is leverage: law firms like Bott and Co report that airlines pay out in 46% of their cases through legal proceedings rather than direct negotiation. A CMC with legal capabilities can push a claim further than most individual passengers.

If you want to check whether your flight qualifies, you can do so for free in under two minutes.

Regulatory Action Is Increasing

The pressure on airlines to handle claims fairly is growing. Spain's €179 million fine package in November 2024 sent a clear signal that EU regulators are prepared to act. The UK CAA's 2025 compliance programme for the 25 largest UK airlines is expected to run for at least 18 months. The EU's interpretative guidelines on EC261, updated in 2024, provide clearer guidance on what airlines can and cannot claim as extraordinary circumstances.

Airlines know enforcement is tightening. Persistent passengers — and the claims services that represent them — are increasingly winning.

Know Your Rights Before You Fly

Before your next trip, it's worth knowing what you're entitled to under EC261. Read our full guide: Your Rights Under EC 261/2004 — Everything You Need to Know.

→ Part of the EC261 Complete Guide — see all related guides.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can an airline legally reject my EC261 claim?

Yes — airlines can reject claims if they believe the disruption was caused by extraordinary circumstances (e.g., severe weather, political unrest) that could not have been avoided even with all reasonable measures taken. However, many rejections misapply this defence. Technical faults, for instance, are generally not extraordinary circumstances under EU case law. Always challenge a rejection with specifics.

What should I do if Ryanair rejects my compensation claim?

Send a written response citing the specific EC261 articles and rejecting their grounds. If they still don't pay within 14 days, escalate to the UK CAA's ADR scheme (for UK flights) or the relevant national NEB. Ryanair paid £1.68 million to passengers via ADR in the year to October 2025 — clear evidence that escalation works.

Is a voucher the same as EC261 cash compensation?

No. Under EC261, you are entitled to cash compensation paid via bank transfer or cheque (at your request). A voucher is not equivalent. You can decline any voucher offer and demand the statutory cash amount: €250, €400, or €600 depending on your flight distance.

How long do I have to claim EC261 compensation?

Time limits vary by country. In the UK, you have up to 6 years. In Germany, 3 years. In France, 5 years. In most EU countries, the minimum is 2 years. You can also claim for past flights you didn't claim for at the time — see our full guide on retroactive claims and time limits, or check whether yours qualifies at FlightOwed.