Wizz Air ordered to compensate Hungarian teenage boys over age dispute

A Hungarian court has ruled that Wizz Air must pay compensation of nearly HUF 400,000 (EUR 1,036) after unlawfully refusing boarding to two teenage brothers at Budapest’s Liszt Ferenc International Airport, citing age-related concerns that later proved unfounded.
Wizz Air refused to let the boys on board

The incident took place in October 2023, when the 14- and 15-year-old boys were due to fly from Budapest to Istanbul to visit their father, who works in the Turkish capital. Despite holding valid tickets, the siblings were denied boarding by airline staff, who claimed the older brother was under 16 and therefore could not take responsibility for travelling with his younger sibling.
According to the family’s legal representative, attorney Roland Tóth, the airline’s justification did not align with its own published rules. Wizz Air’s website clearly states that passengers aged 14 and over are permitted to travel alone without adult supervision. “This condition was fully met in this case,” Tóth said, adding that the airline’s refusal lacked any legal basis.
The boys’ mother had to intervene
As Blikk wrote, after receiving a distressed call from her sons, the boys’ mother immediately went to the airport. Determined to ensure they reached their father, she purchased new tickets for them with Turkish Airlines, allowing the teenagers to travel later that same day. She also demanded an explanation from Wizz Air staff, pointing out that no prior warning had been given during booking that her children would be unable to fly alone.
She further criticised the airline for failing to draw up any official record when boarding was denied. Following the incident, she formally requested reimbursement for the unused Wizz Air tickets, compensation of EUR 250 per child under EU passenger rights rules, and a refund of the EUR 342 spent on replacement tickets. Wizz Air rejected the claim, again referring to age restrictions.
Wizz Air tried to hide behind legal loopholes
The airline later shifted its position, acknowledging that 14-year-olds may indeed travel alone, but argued instead that the rules of the destination country should apply. This argument also collapsed, as Turkish regulations allow children to travel unaccompanied from the age of 12. Despite this, Wizz Air closed the case without compensation.
The family then turned to Hungary’s Conciliation Board, which supported their claim for reimbursement. However, Wizz Air continued to refuse payment, introducing further objections. One such argument was that the passengers had not completed a so-called “Denied Boarding Form”, despite no legal requirement making this a condition for compensation. The airline also claimed that no formal compensation request had been submitted, a position the family’s lawyer described as plainly incorrect.
Wizz Air took it to court and lost
As the dispute dragged on, the mother sought legal representation. In November 2024, her lawyer issued a formal payment demand, which went unanswered. This was followed by a payment order, contested by Wizz Air and ultimately referred to court.
The judge ruled in favour of the family, awarding the full claimed amount, including interest, totalling close to HUF 400,000. During proceedings, an unusual detail also emerged: Wizz Air submitted documentation suggesting the boys could not have arrived on time for boarding due to time discrepancies.
Budapest Airport later confirmed that the airline had mistakenly applied Romanian time, which is one hour ahead of Hungarian time, undermining yet another defence.






Ridiculous judgment.
Wizz Air’s conduct has been reprehensible from start to finish. They outright lied multiple times. The family went through a lot of stress, spanning two years.
400 grand is a spit in the ocean for Wizz Air and does not begin to assuage the ordeal the family endured. Alongside these compensatory damages, the court should have ordered punitive damages amounting to millions of forints, thus teaching Wizz Air a valuable lesson for future instances of mendacity, incompetence, and obstructionism.