Madrid Court Rules in Favor of Police Officers Denied Boarding Over Firearm Policy
A Madrid court has ruled in favor of two police officers who were blocked from boarding a Ryanair flight while on duty, granting them compensation for moral damages. The decision, handed down on July 28, 2022, requires the airline to recompense 1,836 euros for the stress and emotional impact these officers endured during a Tenerife to Madrid journey, despite their official duties on that route. (Citation: Madrid Court of Appeals ruling, 2022)
The capital city’s 5th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the verdict and increased the damages awarded for the boarding denial that disrupted their duties. In the original ruling, Ryanair had agreed to pay 1,436.86 euros, recognizing the unjust nature of the denial and the resulting material harm. However, the airline refused to cover 400 euros claimed as non pecuniary damages, arguing that such damages should fall under broader compensation rules established by European regulation. (Citation: Madrid Court of Appeals, 2022)
A magistrate offered a different perspective, noting that an appeal remains possible and recalling Supreme Court precedent. That precedent indicates that compensation for non pecuniary damages can be awarded independently of the sums outlined in the cited regulation in cases of flight delays or cancellations. This reflects a broader interpretation of damages that can accompany statutory compensation when service disruptions occur. (Citation: Supreme Court guidance on non pecuniary damages, 2020s)
According to the lawsuit, the officers on duty on July 28 reached the boarding gate but were not allowed to enter the aircraft with their firearms, even though they had completed the necessary regulatory documentation to enter the cabin. (Citation: Court filing, July 2022)
Both officers were forced to purchase new tickets the following day to fulfill their duty obligations and reach their destination. The filing states there was no legal justification for denying them boarding, and the disruption caused physical and mental fatigue for passengers as they sought alternative travel options. The consequences included anxiety about potential danger, unforeseen expenses, a wasted day at the destination, and an overnight stay in another city. (Citation: Court records, July 2022)
The complaint emphasizes that, as a result of the alleged wrongful actions, the officers pursued legal action and remained involved in judicial proceedings up to the final verdict, incurring moral damages beyond the direct financial impact. (Citation: Legal filings, July 2022)
Lawyers representing Manuel Chamorro and Ignacio Aznar, who advocate for the Jupol police unit, characterize Ryanair’s actions as abusive, noting that the officers possessed all required regulatory documents and were simply performing their official duties when they were denied boarding. (Citation: Representation by Jupol attorneys, 2022)
This sequence highlights a broader debate about the responsibilities airlines bear when enforcing security policies and how such policies affect law enforcement officers traveling on official duties. The case demonstrates how courts may interpret non pecuniary damages and how these judgments interact with standard compensation regimes, signaling potential future rulings that could influence similar disputes within the aviation sector. (Citation: Aviation law commentary, 2022–2024)