Each of these is a refusal this regime lets a counterparty attempt, paired with the answer to it. Reading them before you write is worth more than any amount of polish on the letter itself.
"It was required for safety, so no compensation is payable"
high likelihoodThe carrier says the disruption was within its control but required for safety purposes under s. 11 — usually a mechanical problem — and therefore pays nothing.
What answers it
Make it prove the timing. Section 1 defines "mechanical malfunction" as a mechanical problem that reduces passenger safety BUT NOT one identified further to scheduled maintenance undertaken in compliance with legal requirements, and defines "required for safety purposes" to exclude scheduled maintenance too. So a fault found during a planned check is not a s. 11 situation at all — it is a s. 12 situation and it pays. Ask the carrier, in writing, when the defect was identified, whether it was found during scheduled maintenance, and what maintenance action followed. An airline unwilling to answer that question in writing has a problem.
SOR/2019-150, s. 1 — s. 1 (definitions of "large carrier", "mechanical malfunction", "required for safety purposes")
"The delay was caused by an earlier disruption outside our control"
high likelihoodThe carrier says the inbound aircraft was late because of weather somewhere else, so the whole day’s disruption falls under s. 10.
What answers it
A knock-on effect is not automatically outside the carrier’s control. The question is what caused YOUR flight to fail, and a carrier that chose not to reposition an aircraft or crew, or that had no reserve capacity, has made an operational choice within s. 12. Ask which specific flight and which specific s. 10 situation it relies on, and what it did to mitigate. If weather cleared hours before your departure, the causal chain is the carrier’s scheduling, not the weather.
SOR/2019-150, s. 10 — s. 10
"We were short of crew and that was beyond our control"
high likelihoodThe carrier presents a crew shortage as an external event.
What answers it
It is not one. Crew shortages are within the carrier’s control: staffing, rostering and reserve cover are the airline’s own responsibility, and the CTA has said so. Section 10 lists the situations that count as external and crew availability is not among them. Compensation is payable under s. 12.
SOR/2019-150, s. 12 — s. 12
"The flight only left two hours late"
high likelihoodThe carrier bands the compensation on the departure delay rather than the arrival delay.
What answers it
Section 19 bands on the delay to ARRIVAL at the final destination shown on your ticket, including any connections on the same itinerary. A flight that left two hours late but caused you to miss a connection and arrive eleven hours late sits in the nine-hour band, not the sub-three-hour one. State your scheduled and actual arrival times at the final destination explicitly in the letter.
SOR/2019-150, s. 19 — s. 19
"Here is a travel credit instead"
high likelihoodThe carrier offers a voucher, credit or loyalty points in place of the statutory compensation.
What answers it
The s. 19 and s. 20 entitlements are to money. A passenger may choose to take a different form of compensation, but only if it is offered with a clear explanation of the monetary amount being given up and is worth more than that amount and does not expire. Decline in writing and repeat the cash demand; acceptance cannot be inferred from silence.
SOR/2019-150, s. 19 — s. 19
"We are a small carrier, so you get CAD 125"
medium likelihoodThe carrier pays on the lower s. 19(1)(b) scale on the basis that it carried under two million passengers.
What answers it
The test in s. 1 is worldwide passengers in EACH of the two preceding calendar years, and it looks at the carrier, not the regional brand painted on the aircraft. Ask the carrier to state its worldwide passenger numbers for both of the two calendar years before your flight. Where a regional operator flies under a mainline brand, identify which legal entity actually held the operating certificate for your flight.
SOR/2019-150, s. 1 — s. 1 (definitions of "large carrier", "mechanical malfunction", "required for safety purposes")
"That was operated by our partner, not us"
medium likelihoodThe carrier that sold the ticket points at the regional or codeshare partner that flew the aircraft.
What answers it
That is correct as far as it goes, and it tells you where to send the letter rather than defeating the claim. Section 2 places the obligations on the carrier that operated the flight. Redirect the demand to the operator and copy the marketing carrier; the claim does not disappear between them.
SOR/2019-150, s. 2 — s. 2