A couple whose flight to Rome was cancelled in May 2025 got their money back, yet still sued a low-cost airline for ILS 16,720 in statutory compensation and punitive damages. The court held that the cancellation was caused by special circumstances beyond the airline's control, dismissed the claim and ordered the couple to pay costs.
What happened
In April 2025 a couple bought return tickets to Rome from a low-cost airline. The outbound flight was set for 17.5.2025 and the return for 21.5.2025. According to them, they paid ILS 1,209 for the tickets and ILS 253 for a suitcase, ILS 1,462 in total.
On 4.5.2025 a ballistic missile fired from Yemen struck the grounds of Ben Gurion Airport, near Terminal 3. Five people were injured and airport operations were suspended. On 9.5.2025 the airline announced that the flight was cancelled and offered a choice between an alternative flight on another date and a refund. The couple chose the refund, and the money was returned to them.
They nevertheless claimed ILS 4,780 in statutory compensation under the Aviation Services Law, because the cancellation notice came less than 14 days before the flight, plus ILS 11,940 in punitive damages on the ground that the airline refused to pay. The case was decided on the written pleadings, without a hearing.
The parties' arguments
The couple argued that other airlines kept flying to Israel during those days, and that the airline itself operated a Tel Aviv-Rome flight on 12.5.2025. They also said they were not offered an alternative flight on the original date.
The airline argued that the cancellation resulted from an exceptional security situation: the missile strike, the military operation in Yemen in the following days, and the expected counter-attack. It submitted photos of the impact, a European Union Aviation Safety Agency warning about Israeli airspace, an International Civil Aviation Organization procedure on conflict zones, and a press report listing airlines that had suspended flights to Israel at the time.
The decision
Section 6(e)(1) of the Aviation Services Law exempts an airline from compensation if it proves the flight was cancelled due to special circumstances beyond its control, and that it could not have prevented the cancellation. The flight was not cancelled during one of the periods in which the "Iron Swords" war temporary provision grants an automatic exemption, so the burden was on the airline.
The court held that the airline met that burden:
- The claim that other airlines kept flying was made in general terms, without saying which airlines, on what dates, or providing any document.
- The airline proved with documents that the 12.5.2025 flight had also been cancelled. The couple were given a chance to respond and filed nothing; nor did they file further arguments after the amended defence.
- Relying on District Court rulings in similar cases, the court found that a missile strike that temporarily shut down the airport is a special circumstance. An airline that proves such a circumstance does not have to prove separately that it could not have prevented the cancellation.
- The fact that the airline did not cancel at once, but assessed the situation for several days, showed that the decision was considered and not taken lightly.
The alternative-flight argument was also rejected: the law requires an airline to offer a flight at the earliest possible time, or later by agreement with the passenger, not on the original date. Had it been possible to fly on the original date, the flight would not have been cancelled. The court further noted that the event occurred only 13 days before the flight, so 14 days' notice was impossible in any case.
With statutory compensation denied, the punitive damages claim, which the couple themselves conceded depended on it, failed too. The court added that the couple did not claim any loss, and that suing for ILS 16,720 over a ILS 1,462 flight that was fully refunded caused considerable unease.
The outcome
The claim was dismissed. The couple were ordered to pay the airline, jointly and severally, ILS 1,000 in costs within 30 days. A request for leave to appeal may be filed with the Tel Aviv District Court within 30 days.
Key takeaways
- Fully refunded for a flight cancelled because of an exceptional security event? Check carefully whether you really have grounds for extra compensation before you sue.
- Claiming that other airlines kept flying? Bring names, dates and documents. A general statement will not do.
- When the court lets you respond to the other side's arguments or documents, respond. Silence leaves their version unchallenged.
- The airline must offer an alternative flight at the earliest possible time, not on the original cancelled date.
- A claim inflated far beyond your actual loss can end with you paying costs.
This article summarizes a published Israeli court decision in plain language and is not legal advice. Every case depends on its facts. The parties' names have been omitted. This is a first-instance decision and may be appealed.
