How long do I have to claim EU 261 flight compensation?

The Short Answer: There Is No Single EU-Wide Deadline

If your flight was delayed, cancelled, or downgraded, Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 entitles you to fixed compensation of €250, €400, €600, or in the post-2026 reform framework, adjusted amounts depending on distance and delay length. But the regulation itself is silent on one practical question every traveller eventually asks: how long do you actually have to file the claim? The answer is that EU 261 sets no statute of limitations of its own. Instead, each member state applies its own national limitation period for contractual and tort claims, and those periods range from as little as one year to as many as six years or more. This means the deadline for your claim depends almost entirely on which country's courts you would use, which in turn usually depends on the airline's registered office or your departure country.

Also worth reading: How does the EU 261 flight delay compensation calculator work and what are my rights? · What documents are needed for EU flight compensation under Regulation 261/2004? · How are EU261 flight delays calculated and what determines the compensation amount?

As of September 2026, this patchwork is under pressure. The long-awaited reform of EU 261, agreed by the Council and Parliament after more than a decade of deadlock, is expected to introduce greater harmonisation over time, but until any new rules are fully transposed and enforced, the national time limits below remain what actually governs your claim. Airlines are well aware of these differences; European carriers are estimated to be sitting on roughly €3.2 billion in unpaid delay compensation, and quietly waiting out short national deadlines is one of the cheapest defences they have. Knowing your deadline is therefore not a technicality — it is often the difference between €600 in your pocket and nothing.

Why Time Limits Vary: The Legal Mechanics Behind the Patchwork

EU 261 is a regulation, which means it applies directly in every member state without national transposition. However, when a regulation is silent on a procedural matter — like limitation periods — national law fills the gap. Courts have generally treated EU 261 compensation claims as arising from the air carriage contract, so the limitation period for contractual claims in the relevant jurisdiction applies. In some countries, courts have instead classified the claim under tort or consumer protection rules, which can carry a different clock.

The relevant jurisdiction is usually determined by where the airline has its registered office or place of business, or by the courts of the place of departure under the Montreal Convention framework. If you flew with a German carrier from Berlin, German law applies. If you flew with an Irish carrier from Lisbon, Irish law likely governs even though the flight left Portugal. This is why two passengers on the same delayed flight can face completely different deadlines depending on which airline operated it. It also explains why airlines sometimes relocate or structure their operations to benefit from shorter limitation periods — a practice consumer groups have criticised repeatedly.

There is one more layer: the Montreal Convention, which governs international carriage, sets a two-year absolute bar on claims for delay and damage. Some courts have applied this two-year period to EU 261 claims on international routes, while others have applied the longer national contractual period. The result is genuine legal uncertainty on certain routes, and the safest practical rule is to assume the shortest plausible deadline applies to your case.

Country-by-Country Time Limits: The Definitive Table

The figures below reflect the commonly applied limitation periods for EU 261 claims as of 2026. Treat them as guidance, not legal advice, because court interpretations shift and the pending reform may change the framework.

Three practical takeaways emerge from this table. First, the UK and Ireland are the most generous jurisdictions at six years, which is why many claims against carriers like Ryanair are filed there. Second, Belgium and Poland are the most punishing at one year — a claim against a Belgian carrier can expire shockingly fast. Third, the Netherlands, Italy, and Belgium often apply the Montreal Convention's two-year bar, so a two-year assumption is the prudent default for those jurisdictions.

How the Deadline Is Calculated: From Flight Date, Not From Refusal

In nearly every jurisdiction, the clock starts on the date of the flight itself — the date the delay or cancellation occurred — not the date the airline refused your claim or stopped replying to your emails. This trips up thousands of travellers every year. A passenger who files a claim in month 20, receives a rejection in month 22, and then sues in month 26 may find the claim time-barred in a two-year jurisdiction even though the airline only formally refused late in the period.

A few jurisdictions calculate differently. Germany's three-year period runs from the end of the year in which the claim arose, so a flight delayed on 15 June 2024 gives you until 31 December 2027. The UK's six-year period runs from the breach date, meaning the flight date. Interruption of the limitation period — for example, by filing a formal claim or court action — works differently in each country, and in some jurisdictions a mere complaint letter does not stop the clock at all. In France and Spain, certain formal steps can suspend or restart the period; in others, only issuing court proceedings does. If you are anywhere near a deadline, the only safe move is to file in court or through a formal enforcement mechanism before it expires.

Practical Steps: What to Do and When

Start by documenting everything on the day of disruption: boarding passes, the airline's written explanation for the cancellation or delay, timestamps of actual departure and arrival, and any vouchers or assistance offered (or refused). Under EU 261, the airline must prove extraordinary circumstances to escape compensation, and its written reason at the time is powerful evidence later — airlines frequently change their story between the airport and the claims stage.

Next, identify the governing jurisdiction by looking at the airline's country of registration. Then file a direct claim with the airline as early as possible, ideally within weeks of the flight. There is no downside to claiming early: compensation amounts are fixed, so there is no discount for waiting, and early claims preserve every option. If the airline rejects the claim or ignores it — a common tactic, given the €3.2 billion backlog across European carriers — escalate to the national enforcement body (NEB) of the departure country, and simultaneously consider a court claim or a claims company. Services like AI Flight Refunds automate this escalation path, assessing eligibility under EU 261, generating legally grounded claim letters, and tracking deadlines so a one-year Belgian or Polish window does not quietly lapse. If you handle it yourself, set a calendar reminder at the halfway point of your limitation period as a hard trigger for escalation.

Direct Claim vs Enforcement Body vs Claims Company: A Comparison

The honest assessment: direct claims work well perhaps half the time, but the rejection-and-stall strategy is widespread among major carriers precisely because most passengers give up. NEBs are inconsistent — Germany's Luftfahrt-Bundesamt and Spain's AESA process thousands of cases, while some member states' bodies are understaffed and slow. Claims companies charge a meaningful cut but convert a stalled claim into a litigated one, which matters enormously in short-deadline countries. For a €600 claim against a Belgian carrier with a one-year limit, paying a 25% fee to guarantee the deadline is met is usually the rational trade.

Common Mistakes That Kill Otherwise Valid Claims

The most frequent fatal error is assuming a uniform deadline. Travellers read that 'you have years to claim' — true in the UK and Ireland — then apply that assumption to a flight with a Belgian or Polish carrier and discover the claim expired twelve months after the flight. The second mistake is confusing the compensation claim with the refund claim: a ticket refund for a cancelled flight and EU 261 compensation are separate entitlements, sometimes with different limitation treatment, and settling one does not automatically settle the other unless you signed a release.

Third, passengers accept vouchers or travel credits without reading the fine print. Many airline settlement forms include a waiver of all EU 261 claims, including compensation you have not yet claimed. Fourth, travellers wait for the airline's 'final response' before acting, not realising that in most jurisdictions silence does not pause the clock. Fifth, people misjudge extraordinary circumstances disputes: an airline's rejection letter citing 'air traffic control' or 'weather' is often wrong — courts have repeatedly ruled that routine technical faults and crew scheduling problems are not extraordinary — but you only get to argue that if you are still inside the deadline. Finally, some passengers on connecting itineraries assume each leg has its own deadline calculation; in reality, the treatment of connections under EU 261 depends on whether the flights were booked as a single reservation, and getting this wrong can forfeit a valid claim entirely.

When to Act: The 2026 Reform and Why Waiting Is a Bad Strategy

The 2026 political agreement on the EU 261 reform — the first serious attempt in over a decade — is expected to adjust compensation thresholds, tighten the definition of extraordinary circumstances, and address enforcement gaps. Commentators have been blunt that the compromise left few parties satisfied: airlines face continued payout pressure, while consumer groups argue the deal watered down passenger gains. Whatever the final text, transitional rules mean claims for flights already taken will almost certainly remain governed by the old framework and national limitation periods. Do not wait for reform to rescue an old claim.

The practical rule: act within six months of the flight if you can, and never later than the shortest plausible deadline for your jurisdiction. If your flight was more than a year ago and involved a Belgian, Polish, Dutch, or Italian carrier, treat the claim as urgent — every week matters. If it involved a UK or Irish carrier, you have breathing room, but airlines contest old claims more aggressively because records and witness evidence degrade. Compensation amounts are fixed by law, so there is zero financial benefit to patience; the only variable time changes is your chance of success, and it moves in one direction — down.

Cost, Effort, and Realistic Expectations

Filing directly with an airline costs nothing but time: typically an hour to prepare a well-evidenced claim, plus follow-up correspondence. Court filing fees vary widely, from under €100 in some jurisdictions to several hundred in others, and are usually recoverable if you win. Claims companies charge contingency fees generally in the 20–35% range, meaning a €600 claim nets you €390–€480, with no upfront cost and no fee on failure. For claims under roughly €300 equivalent, self-filing usually makes more sense; for contested €600 claims in strict-deadline countries, delegation often nets more in expectation than a DIY claim that quietly expires.

Set expectations realistically. Roughly half of direct claims are initially rejected, often with boilerplate extraordinary-circumstances language. Escalation and litigation succeed frequently when the evidence is solid — court statistics in Germany and the Netherlands show high passenger win rates in contested EU 261 cases — but the process can take months. The travellers who recover compensation are rarely the ones with the strongest moral case; they are the ones with the best documents who filed before the clock ran out.