Boarding pass as a golden ticket: when does a passenger have a confirmed reservation?

On March 6th 2025[1], the Court of Justice of the European Union (the "CJEU") ruled on an issue that directly affects many travelers and airlines: can a boarding pass serve as evidence of a "confirmed reservation" under the rules of Regulation 261/2004[2]? This decision is significant for how compensation in cases of flight delays and cancellations is assessed. In this blog, we delve into this specific question and what it means for both passengers and carriers.

Facts and Legal Framework

In this case, the passengers had booked a package holiday and took a flight from Spain to Poland, operated by the carrier. The flight arrived with a delay of more than 22 hours.

As a result of this delay, the passengers claimed compensation under Regulation 261/2004. To demonstrate their entitlement to compensation, they submitted their boarding passes as evidence.

However, the carrier disputed that the passengers had a confirmed reservation within the meaning of Article 3(2a) of Regulation 261/2004. Article 3 defines the scope of the Regulation, and paragraph 2 states, among other things, that for the Regulation to apply, passengers must have a confirmed reservation.

Article 2(g) of Regulation 261/2004 defines a “reservation” as “the fact that the passenger has a ticket, or other proof, which indicates that the reservation has been accepted and registered by the air carrier or tour operator”.

The referring court questioned whether the presentation of a boarding pass by a passenger could constitute "other proof" under Article 2(g) of Regulation 261/2004, showing that the booking had been accepted and registered by the air carrier or tour operator.

On the one hand, the court noted that it is difficult to explain how a passenger would obtain a boarding pass without having a confirmed reservation.

On the other hand, the court referred to a judgment by the CJEU from 21 December 2021 (Azurair et al.)[3]. That case addressed whether a travel confirmation issued by a tour operator qualifies as a confirmed reservation. The CJEU held that it does, emphasizing that it concerned a document that included the “points of departure and destination, times of departure and arrival, and the flight number […]”[4]. A boarding pass, however, does not include all of this information.

Based on that, the referring court posed the following questions:

1. “Must Article 2(g) of Regulation [No 261/2004] be interpreted as meaning that a passenger’s boarding pass may constitute other proof, which indicates that the reservation has been accepted and registered by the air carrier or tour operator?”
    
2. “Must Article 3(2)(a) of [Regulation No 261/2004] be interpreted as meaning that passengers who have a boarding pass for a particular flight, where no special abnormal circumstance is demonstrated, should be considered to have a confirmed reservation on the flight concerned?”

Ruling by the CJEU

The CJEU addresses these preliminary questions jointly. The core issue was whether a boarding pass could serve as “other proof” under Article 2(g), thereby demonstrating that the passenger had a confirmed reservation as required by Article 3(2a) of Regulation 261/2004.

The CJEU holds that the term “other proof” must be interpreted broadly. It concludes that a boarding pass issued to a passenger grants them the right to travel and permits them to board the aircraft. As such, it may constitute “other proof” that the booking was accepted and registered, within the meaning of Article 2(g) of Regulation 261/2004.

The fact that the boarding pass may not include the arrival time does not, according to the CJEU, change this assessment. It referred in this context to the relevant consideration from the 2021 Azurair et al. ruling[5]:

“51 In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the first questions in Cases C‑188/20 and C‑196/20 is that Article 3(2)(a) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that the passenger has a ‘confirmed reservation’, within the meaning of that provision, where the tour operator submits to that passenger, with whom it has a contract, ‘other proof’, within the meaning of Article 2(g) of that regulation, by which he or she is assured transport on a particular flight, individualised by points of departure and destination, times of departure and arrival, and the flight number, even in cases where that tour operator has not received confirmation from the air carrier concerned as to the times of departure and arrival of that flight.”

The CJEU notes that the circumstances in that earlier case were different from those in the current one. In that situation, the discrepancy lay in the fact that the information provided to the passengers by the tour operator differed from the information provided to the tour operator by the airline. In that case, passengers only had the documentation provided by the tour operator. In this case, however, passengers had a boarding pass. Therefore, different rules apply.

Moreover, the CJEU emphasizes that when passengers check in on time and take the flight in question while holding a boarding pass, it should be assumed that they fulfilled the requirement of having a confirmed reservation for that flight.

A Boarding Pass Can Constitute “Other Proof”

The CJEU therefore answers the preliminary questions by ruling that a boarding pass can indeed constitute “other proof” within the meaning of Article 2(g) of Regulation 261/2004, and that a passenger holding such a boarding pass is deemed to have a “confirmed reservation” for the relevant flight.

It is desirable to have greater clarity on how such documents should be interpreted, so that both passengers and carriers know where they stand. This judgment contributes to more consistency in the handling of compensation claims and provides a solid foundation for future legal proceedings in this area.