Airline passengers were denied compensation for 2 Aperol Spritz cocktails after a court ruled that alcohol isn't a 'refreshment'

• A couple was denied compensation for two Aperol Spritz drinks they bought during a flight delay.
• European passengers can get compensation for refreshments if their flights are delayed or cancelled.
• A German court ruled that as the drinks were alcoholic, they didn't count as refreshments.

A couple who tried to get compensation for two Aperol Spritz cocktails during a flight delay had their claim denied after a German court ruled alcohol didn't count as a refreshment.

The Amtsgericht Hannover, Hanover's district court, made the ruling after the couple complained when an unspecified airline refused to reimburse them for the drinks.

The couple had booked a flight from Hanover to Miami via London, and a return flight via New York and London.

Their outbound flight arrived more than three hours late, while their return flight was canceled, with the plaintiffs being routed to Hamburg via Madrid instead, per the court press release.

They were then forced to take a train to Madrid, eventually arriving at their destination with a four-and-a-half-hour delay, it added.

Under the European Union's air passenger rights regulations, the couple were entitled to compensation for "meals and refreshments in proportion to the waiting time," according to the release.

As the couple weren't offered anything by the unnamed airline, they were entitled to purchase their own refreshments and claim the cost back later.

During stopovers, the couple spent 20.80 euros, about $23.10, in Madrid and 88 euros ($97.70) in London on meals and beverages as part of that compensation. Part of this bill included two Aperol Spritz drinks that cost a total of £15 ($18.60).

However, the cost of those drinks was challenged by the airline, which argued that alcoholic beverages didn't count as refreshments. Hanover's district court sided with the airline.

"According to the court, the term 'refreshment' precludes the inclusion of alcoholic beverages, whose effect is typically the opposite," the court ruled, suggesting that alcohol's tendency to dehydrate consumers prevented it from being labeled a refreshment.

There were also two Camden Hells beers on the couple's receipt, which the court didn't have to scrutinize as they had not claimed compensation for them. Had they been included, it might have formed the basis for a more complex argument.

"If they were 'craft beer,' it would also be possible that they were non-alcoholic, which the court could consider to be a 'refreshment,'" the press release stated.

Camden Hells is a lager made in the UK with an alcohol-by-volume percentage of 4.6%, meaning it would also likely fail the court's test for a "refreshment."