The landmark Huzar v Jet2.com Supreme Court ruling has been followed up by a host of other decisions, which have gone against airlines.

“What we’re seeing is claimants, egged on by claimant companies, continually pushing the boundaries… of what the airlines are going to be expected to pick up the tab for,” said Sue Barham, a partner in Holman Fenwick Willan’s aerospace team.

Barham, who was speaking at the Abta Travel Law Seminar, said that while many of the original cases centred around technical problems, in recent times different issues had been brought up.

In Ash v Thomas Cook a bird strike was not deemed to be extraordinary and in an appeal heard at Reading County Court earlier this year a passenger came out on top against Monarch over a delay caused by a lightning strike.

Although the above two cases are not legally binding, Barham said they were “causing headaches” because they are being referred to.

She added: “We have moved to a position where claimants come at this from saying if something could happen that means that it’s inherent, it’s not extraordinary anymore.”

Regulation 261/2004 came into effect in 2005. It deals with compensation and assistance in the event passengers are denied boarding or face a cancellation or delay.

For a three-hour delay the amount of compensation airlines are required to pay out can be as much as £470.