Interview of the month: Steven Truxal

As part of our new section "Inside the Network", this month we had the pleasure of speaking with Steven Truxal, Professor of Air and Space Law at Leiden University and Director of the International Institute of Air and Space Law (IIASL).

---

OSS: Thank you for taking the time to speak with us despite your demanding schedule and frequent work-related travel. We are delighted to include your insights in this edition of our Newsletter.

To begin, we would like to address a topic that has recently been at the centre of attention across the aviation sector.

OSS: The ongoing revision of Regulation (EC) 261/2004 has sparked debate among industry stakeholders. From your perspective, what legal or operational shifts should airlines and legal service providers prepare for?

Steven Truxal: I expect that all concerned will warmly welcome the revision of the ageing Regulation, particularly in light of the need for clearer rules overall and, more specifically, for a defined list of extraordinary circumstances—or at least clear criteria for determining what qualifies as such—as well as greater clarity regarding the role of intermediaries. Air passenger rights derive from the EU’s strong approach to consumer protection, which must be balanced against the operational realities faced by airlines. I also expect that compromises will be required on delay compensation thresholds, as well as consensus on carry-on baggage.

OSS: In your view, what are the most pressing legal challenges currently facing european (international) aviation, and how do you see these evolving in the next decade?

Steven Truxal: I am not sure that the most pressing challenges are primarily “legal” in nature; rather, they are largely “regulatory.” I would divide these into two categories: operations-based and market-based. In my view, the main operational challenges for aviation in Europe relate to capacity management in the use of airport infrastructure and air navigation services, particularly in the context of growing demand for air services. Greater alignment in the use of services and equipment is needed to ensure increased harmonisation across Europe, including in the area of airport electrification. Environmental protection issues (such as noise emissions, greenhouse gases, ultrafine particles, and contrails) also present operations-based regulatory challenges.

As regards market-based challenges, I see the completion of the Single European Aviation Market as an ongoing priority, with progress already visible, for example, in the ongoing Fitness Check of the airport acquis (groundhandling, airport slots, and airport charges) and in the revision of Air Services Regulation 1008/2008 currently underway. Over the next decade, we can expect significant progress in these areas, driven by operational improvements enabled by new technologies and investments, as well as updated rules aimed at enhancing the competitiveness and resilience of the Single European Aviation Market.

OSS: Given your background in both academia and industry, how do you think legal education should evolve to better prepare the next generation of aviation lawyers and policymakers?

Steven Truxal: Lawyers are trained to be problem-solvers and to provide legal certainty; both of these qualities are valued by industry and regulators alike. There is never a dull day in the world of aviation: indeed, there are daily challenges to address and opportunities to pursue. These require legal input in the form of negotiations, lobbying, and contracts.

Of course, lawyers and regulators need to know the law, but they should also remain critical of it—it is not static—and they must understand how the industry works. In Leiden, my students receive their education from law academics and practising lawyers on the one hand, and from some 50 national and European regulators, as well as representatives from the industry and international organisations—some of whom are economists or engineers—on the other, over the course of the one-year Advanced LL.M. (Master of Laws) degree in Air and Space Law.

OSS: With multimodal transport becoming a growing focus at the EU level, how do you see passenger rights evolving in the context of combined air-rail or other multimodal journeys? In your view, will future regulation bring greater clarity and protection for passengers, or could it instead lead to uncertainty and a lack of clear responsibility among operators?

Steven Truxal: In Europe, cooperation between airlines and rail companies has existed for over 40 years, but in recent years these collaborations have truly “taken off.” I expect this trend to continue, particularly in areas where airports are well connected to rail services, such as my home airport, Amsterdam Schiphol. As the number of multimodal journeys increases, it becomes increasingly important to provide legal certainty both to airlines and rail companies, on the one hand, and to passengers, on the other. This includes addressing questions such as who is liable for a delay on one segment (for example, rail) that causes a passenger to miss a flight, and, crucially, whom the passenger should contact when such an incident occurs, especially in the case of passengers with reduced mobility. Clear and effective laws and regulations in this area are essential to ensure smooth operations and satisfied passengers.  

OSS: The proposed reform of the EU passenger rights framework includes provisions aimed at clarifying passengers’ rights concerning hand luggage: especially regarding size and surcharges. How do you view the tension between the EU’s efforts to standardize hand luggage rights and airlines’ commercial freedom to define their ancillary service policies?

Steven Truxal: On my recent flights, I have experienced significant delays due to insufficient cabin space for all the carry-on luggage. On one occasion, the delay caused me to miss my onward connection. This is frustrating for passengers, but it is also costly for airlines: aircraft generate revenue when in the air, and conversely, they incur costs while on the ground. I believe airlines will want to know exactly how many trolleys to expect in order to expedite boarding and disembarkation. Low-cost carriers have shown that passengers pay for what they get, and if they do not want a particular service, they simply do not pay. In my view, the size of a carry-on trolley should be standardised (not only in Europe), but passengers should not automatically have the right to bring one. A small personal item, such as a laptop bag or rucksack capable of holding a passport, wallet, phone, headphones, and medication, should be allowed for all, while a carry-on trolley should remain a (bookable) option.  

Thank you for the interview!