Missed connection compensation in Romania: the two-test rule

A missed connecting flight feels like an injustice you cannot do much about — by the time you stand at the transfer desk at Frankfurt or Munich watching your onward flight push back, the day already feels lost. The good news is that EU 261/2004 protects this exact scenario, and the right to compensation comes down to just two questions. Get both answers right and you are owed between 250 and 600 euro. Get one wrong and you may have no claim at all, even if the travel day was ruined. This page works through the two-test rule for Romanian passengers, with the line where claims actually fall, and the practical routes through ANPC, AACR and the Judecătoria.

The two-test rule that decides every missed connection

The simplest way to know where you stand after a missed transfer is to run two questions in sequence.

Question one: were the flights on the same booking? If the whole journey sits under one booking reference — one ticket covering every leg — EU case law treats the trip as a single connected whole. The Court of Justice settled this in Wegener (C-537/17, 2018): a journey booked together, even with several different operating airlines, is one transport unit for the purposes of EU 261. It does not matter that the individual leg that ran late was itself short.

Question two: how late did you arrive at your final destination? The relevant delay is the one measured at the gate of your final destination — not the departure delay, not how late any intermediate leg was. If you finally reached the city named at the end of your ticket three hours or more after the scheduled arrival time, the delay test is met. This rule comes from Sturgeon (joined cases C-402/07 and C-432/07, 2009) and was applied specifically to connecting flights in Folkerts (C-11/11, 2013).

If both answers are yes, you normally have a compensation claim. If either is no, read on — that is where most of the misunderstandings, and most of the disputes that end up before a Judecătoria, actually sit.

"One flight was delayed but I still arrived on time" — the most common misread

Romanian travel forums are full of versions of the same question: a flight from Cluj-Napoca to Munich was an hour late, but the passenger still caught the Munich–New York connection because the layover was generous, or because the airline put them on the next departure. Is there a claim?

The short answer is no, and that is the whole logic of the regulation. EU 261 does not compensate the delay itself. It compensates you for arriving late at your final destination. A late leg that ends in an on-time final arrival pays nothing.

Turn the situation around and the same logic protects you. If you miss the connection so badly that you ultimately arrive five hours late, it does not matter that the first flight was only "a little" late or that the second airline ran perfectly. What matters is the five hours at the final destination — not the twenty minutes at the layover. For a deeper walk-through of how delay claims are valued, see our guide on flight delay compensation in Romania .

Single booking versus separate tickets — the line that decides claims

This is the difference most passengers do not understand, and it is the single biggest reason claims fail in practice.

A booking Bucharest–Frankfurt–Singapore sold as one ticket means the airline carries responsibility for the chain holding together. If the Bucharest–Frankfurt leg runs so late that you miss Frankfurt–Singapore, that is a single connected journey that became heavily delayed, and you have a claim — assessed on the whole-journey distance, so almost certainly 600 euro.

If you booked Bucharest–Frankfurt with TAROM and Frankfurt–Singapore with Singapore Airlines as two separate transactions, no such link exists in EU law. If the first leg ran twenty minutes late and you missed the second, Singapore Airlines has done nothing wrong — its flight departed on time — and TAROM only delayed you by twenty minutes, not three hours. You are left without an EU 261 claim, even though the entire travel day collapsed.

The Romanian consumer law angle does not fix this. ANPC may try to mediate, but it cannot create a legal obligation that EU 261 does not establish. The lesson is to think about it at the booking stage: a single ticket is not just more convenient, it gives you a layer of legal protection that two separate tickets do not.

How much, and against which airline

The amount follows the standard EU 261 ladder: 250 euro, 400 euro or 600 euro depending on flight distance. The key point for connecting journeys is that distance is calculated on the whole trip — from the first departure point to the final destination — not per leg. A connecting journey from Bucharest to São Paulo via Madrid is a single long-haul trip worth 600 euro, even though each individual leg is shorter.

The claim is directed at the operating air carrier — the airline that physically operated the flight. Where a single booking involves several airlines, the claim is in practice directed at the carrier whose flight caused the miss. The CJEU confirmed in Wirth (C-532/17, 2018) that even in a wet-lease arrangement — where one airline leases an aircraft and crew from another — the operating carrier remains the liable party.

This matters in Romania because some routes from Bucharest, Cluj-Napoca and Timișoara are commercially marketed by one airline (Lufthansa, KLM, Air France) but operated by a regional partner. The claim follows the operating airline, not the brand on your ticket cover.

How to enforce a missed connection claim from Romania

The right to compensation under EU law is one thing — actually collecting the money is another. Romanian passengers have three escalation routes once the airline refuses the initial written complaint or stays silent for more than 30 days.

ANPC (Autoritatea Națională pentru Protecția Consumatorilor) handles consumer complaints generally. For airlines with a Romanian commercial presence, ANPC can pressure a settlement and frequently does. The complaint can be filed online in Romanian, with English supporting documentation accepted.

AACR (Autoritatea Aeronautică Civilă Română) is the National Enforcement Body designated under article 16 of EU 261/2004 for Romania. AACR will not order the airline to pay you directly, but a formal AACR finding that your right exists carries serious weight in any subsequent civil proceedings.

Judecătoria — the local first-instance civil court — is often the most effective option. For amounts under 10,000 RON, which covers every individual EU 261 claim up to 600 euro, the simplified procedure under article 1026 of the New Code of Civil Procedure applies: low court fee, no mandatory lawyer, judgment usually within 30 to 60 days. The CJEU confirmed in Rehder (C-204/08, 2009) that you can sue at either the departure or the destination airport, so a passenger flying Bucharest–Frankfurt–Toronto can bring the action in Romania even if the operating carrier is German.

For the full step-by-step procedure, our guide on how to file a flight delay claim from Romania walks through each stage with the forms and deadlines that apply.

The three-year prescription clock in Romania

Romania applies a three-year prescription period to EU 261 claims under article 2517 of the Civil Code. That is the general limitation for consumer obligations and the period Romanian courts have applied consistently to flight compensation cases. The CJEU confirmed in Cuadrench Moré (C-139/11, 2013) that national limitation periods govern EU 261 claims — there is no uniform EU-wide deadline, which is why the timeframe in Romania differs from neighbouring countries.

The clock runs from the date of the disrupted flight, not from the date the airline first refused the claim and not from later correspondence. So a missed connection on 15 June 2023 must be the subject of a court claim filed by 15 June 2026 at the latest. After that date, a Romanian Judecătoria will reject the action as time-barred regardless of how strong the merits are.

Three years sounds generous, but airlines routinely drag claims through six to twelve months of correspondence before a final refusal. If you are within twelve months of the deadline and the carrier is still stalling, the safest move is to file directly at the Judecătoria rather than chase another round of emails.

Quick comparison: when you have a claim and when you do not

If your situation does not fit cleanly into one of these rows, compare it against the two-test rule rather than trying to match by example. The two questions are the law; the examples are just illustrations.

For the original Romanian guidance

For Romanian readers who would rather see this analysis in Romanian, the native version sits at compensare pentru zbor de legătură pierdut . Both pages cover the same legal substance — the choice is purely about which language you prefer.

Get a missed connection claim moving without the airline runaround

If your missed connection ticks both boxes — single booking and three hours or more delay at the final destination — the airline owes you money under EU law. The only real question is how to collect efficiently without spending three months exchanging emails. If you would rather hand the whole procedure to a specialist on a no-win-no-fee basis, particularly when the operating carrier is non-EU or notoriously slow to settle, a claim service handles the entire file end to end.

Check your missed connection in two minutes with AirHelp — no win, no fee

This is not legal advice

This page is based on published EU regulation, CJEU case law and Romanian institutional sources. For advice on your individual case, contact ANPC (Autoritatea Națională pentru Protecția Consumatorilor) or AACR (Autoritatea Aeronautică Civilă Română), the National Enforcement Body for air passenger rights in Romania, or consult a Romanian lawyer specialised in consumer law.

Sources and further reading

• EUR-Lex — Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 consolidated text
• Court of Justice of the EU — Wegener, case C-537/17 (a connecting journey on a single booking is a single transport unit)
• Court of Justice of the EU — Folkerts, case C-11/11 (delay at the final destination of a connecting flight is what counts)
• Court of Justice of the EU — Sturgeon, joined cases C-402/07 and C-432/07 (three-hour threshold for compensation)
• Court of Justice of the EU — Wirth, case C-532/17 (operating carrier liable in wet-lease arrangements)
• Court of Justice of the EU — Cuadrench Moré, case C-139/11 (national limitation periods apply)
• ANPC (Autoritatea Națională pentru Protecția Consumatorilor) — consumer complaints route
• AACR (Autoritatea Aeronautică Civilă Română) — National Enforcement Body under article 16 of EU 261/2004

Last reviewed: 2 June 2026.