By S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors · Published 25 February 2026 · Informational content, not legal advice
About this article: A general explainer prepared by S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors on a recurring type of dispute. It does not report a specific judgment or order, names no parties and gives no case citation, so it should not be cited as authority. Law and practice change; please verify against the current statute and primary sources before relying on it.
A flight delay that causes a passenger to miss a connecting or onward flight is commonly pursued as a complaint of deficiency in service under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Two questions usually decide the outcome: why the flight was delayed, and what loss the delay actually caused.
On the first question, an airline that relies on 'operational reasons' is generally expected to show what those reasons were. A bare assertion, unsupported by records such as air traffic control logs, weather reports or technical inspection records, is unlikely to establish that the delay arose from a cause beyond the airline's control.
On the second, consumer commissions tend to separate the airline's standard delay compensation from consequential loss that can be proved, such as the cost of a replacement ticket bought at short notice, cancellation charges or a forfeited booking. Compensation for inconvenience and mental agony is a separate head, and each head generally needs its own proof.
Key Points
- The airline is generally expected to prove the cause of a delay and not just assert 'operational reasons'.
- Consequential loss and compensation for inconvenience are separate heads, each needing proof.
- A complaint can be filed with the consumer commission within two years of the cause of action.