102 ANNUAL REPORT 2017 There is no right to compensation in cases where a cancellation or delay has been caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken (Article 5(3)). The Regulation does not define what is to be understood by ‘extraordinary circumstances’. However, the Regulation states that such circumstances may, in particular, occur in cases of political instability, meteorological conditions which are incompatible with the operation of the flight concerned, security risks, unexpected flight safety shortcomings and strikes that affect the operation of an operating air carrier. The Transport and Construction Agency was of the opinion that the delay had been caused by extraordinary circumstances which could not have been avoided even if all reasonable measures had been taken. In the Ombudsman’s opinion illness of one cabin crew member in a case such as the present could not be regarded as an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ within the meaning of Article 5(3). Even for that reason alone, the Ombudsman did not concur with the Agency’s decision that the man was not entitled to compensation for the delay. O. MINISTRY OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND SCIENCE The following statements on cases concluded in 2017 have been published: 2017-3. Access to information in research evaluation report could not on the available basis be denied under section 33 paragraph (5) of Access to Public Administration Files Act A journalist complained to the Ombudsman because the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) and the Danish Agency for Institutions and Educational Grants (formerly the Danish Agency for Higher Education) had denied him access with reference to section 33 paragraph (5) of the Access to Public Administration Files Act to information in a research evaluation report. The evaluation had been carried out by five external researchers, and the au­ thorities stated to the Ombudsman that granting access to the specific evaluation report would involve an obvious risk that the DTU would not in future be able to ensure that it could obtain reliable, critical expert evaluations of research carried out at the University. The authorities were also of the opinion that there was a need to protect the researchers and research groups whose