Two claimants request payment by the defendant of € 680 as compensation on the basis of Art. 6 in conjunction with Art. 7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004. The claimants had booked a return flight from Barcelona to Amsterdam, but the flight was canceled. It was reported at the gate that the flight had been canceled and they were requested to collect their luggage and have the flight rebooked at the flight desk. Shortly thereafter, the employee at the defendant's flight desk informed the claimants that the flight had departed and that transfer was not possible because they had missed the flight. After a conversation with a manager, it was confirmed that the plane had left without passengers and that there was a communication error. The defendant disputed that it is obliged to pay any compensation to the applicant. On 24 June 2010, there was a public service strike in France that affected the flights because the air traffic controllers took part in the strike. The court considered that it cannot be inferred from the explanation provided by the defendant that they provided clear information to the claimants and kept them adequately informed of the developments. The claimants have not been able to fly to Amsterdam against their will. Thus, the sub-district court considered they were entitled to lodge a request on the basis of the ESCP Regulation. It could not be said that the defendant made all reasonable efforts to prevent the aforementioned course of events. Also, it is not be retained that an exceptional circumstance occurred as referred to in the Regulation (EC) No 261/2004, whereby the obligation to compensate must be limited or excluded. The sub-district court order the defendant to pay the claimants a € 500 reimbursement of which 380 remained to be paid), extrajudicial costs (€ 75), statutory interest, and costs of proceedings (€ 172). The requested certification of the decision was granted on the basis of the provisions of Art. 20 of Regulation (EC) No 861/2007.