The CJEU ruled that it does. While the notion of "extraordinary circumstances" must be interpreted strictly, since it creates exceptions to the high level of air passenger protection (para 18), meteorological conditions are explicitly recognised as such circumstances (para 21). This includes "the risk of the aircraft being struck by lightning" (para 23).
The Court emphasised that this risk is not inherent to the normal nature of activities of air carriers, even though planes are designed to withstand such events (para 22). Drawing a parallel with bird strikes, the Court classified both as "collision with a foreign body" (para 24). Moreover, the mandatory safety inspections following a lightning strike are considered distinct from routine malfunctions of aircraft components. These inspections are not "intrinsically linked to the operating system" of the plane (para 26). The lightning strike itself is deemed an event outside the actual control of the air carrier (para 31). As a result, the two cumulative conditions required to classify an event as an "extraordinary circumstance" were found to be satisfied.
The judgment leaves it to national courts to assess whether the air carrier took all reasonable measures to avoid long delay for passengers. This includes evaluating whether the airline acted diligently, without being expected to make "intolerable sacrifices in the light of capacities of its undertaking at the relevant time" (para 37).
