# No-Show Clause: Airline Cancelled My Return Flight

> Missed the outbound and the airline voided your return? No CJEU ruling exists, but Spain's Supreme Court struck the clause down. Letter to demand carriage.

- Canonical: https://flightclaimletters.pages.dev/guides/no-show-return-flight-ban-letter/
- Section: Refunds & expenses (https://flightclaimletters.pages.dev/guides/#refund)
- Published: 6 Sept 2026 · Figures checked: 6 Sept 2026 · 4 min read
- Source site: flightclaimletters — https://flightclaimletters.pages.dev/ · General information, not legal advice.

A no-show clause lets an airline cancel the rest of a ticket when you do not fly one leg of it. There is no Court of Justice ruling on the clause. Spain's Supreme Court confirmed that Iberia's version was void in a case brought by the consumer organisation OCU. The letter below asks for carriage, or the money.

```text
[Your full name]
[Your address]
[Email]
[Phone]

[Today's date]

[Airline name] — Customer Relations / Claims
[Airline claims address or online claim form]

Re: Cancellation of the return leg after a missed outbound flight
Booking reference [Booking reference]
Outbound flight [First flight number] on [Original flight date]
Return flight [Second flight number] on [Flight date]
Route [Departure airport] to [Final destination airport]
Your reference [Reference number]

Dear Sir or Madam,

I hold a confirmed booking, reference [Booking reference], covering
flight [First flight number] and flight [Second flight number]. I did
not travel on [First flight number] on [Original flight date]. You have
[cancelled / declared void] the remaining flight on the booking.

I paid for both flights. Not using one of them did not reduce your cost
of carrying me on the other, and I ask you to honour the booking.

The term you rely on was not individually negotiated with me. Please
identify it by number in your conditions of carriage and explain the
basis on which you say it binds me. I put you on notice that terms of
this kind have been held unenforceable by national courts, and that I
will refer this to the competent consumer authority.

I therefore ask you, within 14 days:

  1. To restore my reservation on [Second flight number], or to carry me
     on the next available flight on that route at no extra charge; or
  2. Failing that, to refund the unused portion of the ticket,
     [Currency] [Refund amount], to [Payment details].

If you refuse both, please say so in writing and give your reasons, so
that I can put your answer before the authority and, if necessary, a
court.

Yours faithfully,

[Signature]
[Your full name]
```

**How to use it**

1. Send it the moment you know you will miss the outbound, and before the return date if you can.
2. Ask for carriage first and money second. It is much cheaper for the airline to reinstate a seat than to argue.
3. Quote the booking reference and both flight numbers, so nobody can treat it as two separate tickets.
4. Ask for the clause by its number. A term the airline will not identify is a term it will not defend.
5. Keep the reply. Whichever way it goes, it is the document your consumer body or your court reads.

> **Write before you rebook.** While the return still exists you are asking for a seat, which the airline can simply give you. Once you have bought a replacement ticket you are asking for damages instead, which is a slower and much more contested claim. If you have already flown home on someone else's aircraft, the realistic ask is the refund of the unused leg, not the cost of the new ticket.

## Is the no-show clause illegal everywhere in the EU?

Not settled. We found no Court of Justice ruling on it, and we have not verified rulings outside Spain, so this page does not claim one. What is verified is that the First Chamber of the Spanish Supreme Court confirmed the nullity of Iberia's no-show clause in collective proceedings brought by the consumer organisation OCU, as recorded in the [judiciary's own press note](https://www.poderjudicial.es/cgpj/es/Poder-Judicial/Noticias-Judiciales/El-Tribunal-Supremo-confirma-la-nulidad-de-varias-clausulas-generales-contempladas-en-los-contratos-de-vuelos-con-Iberia). Elsewhere the argument runs through national law implementing Directive 93/13/EEC, under which a term not individually negotiated that creates a significant imbalance is not binding on the consumer. Ask your national enforcement body or European Consumer Centre what the courts in your country have decided.

## Does EU261 help here?

Not directly. Regulation 261/2004 pays for cancellations by the airline, denied boarding and long delays; it does not regulate what a contract may say about unused legs. Whether refusing to carry a passenger who holds a valid reservation on the return is denied boarding under the regulation is a question we have not seen decided, so the letter argues contract and unfair terms and keeps the regulation out of it. If the airline itself then cancels the return flight, the ordinary rules apply and the [refund or re-route letter](/guides/refund-vs-reroute-letter/) is the right one.

## Can I buy a new ticket and claim the cost back?

You can ask, and airlines sometimes pay. But that is a damages claim, and it is harder than asking for the seat you already bought: you have to show the loss was caused by the airline's breach and that you kept it reasonable. Buy the cheapest sensible replacement, keep every receipt, and claim it in the same letter as the refund of the unused leg.

If the airline refuses, escalate. The route for an EU or UK carrier is in [escalate to the regulator](/guides/escalate-to-regulator/); if the sum justifies it, the [letter before claim](/guides/final-demand-letter-before-court/) is the step before issuing, and [time limits by country](/guides/claim-time-limit-by-country/) tells you how long you have. Where the two legs were bought as separate tickets rather than one booking, the analysis changes completely — read [separate tickets and missed connections](/guides/separate-tickets-missed-connection/) instead.