Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

ARTICLE 11 | CHIARA TINCANI 275 the subsequent decree n. 2017 – 1871 of 29 December 2017 28 . This is surprising, because art. L. 211 – 12 of the ordonnance is not consistent with the Directive or, at the very least, does not fulfil the harmonisation criteria of the EU text, except with the subsequent additions and with an overlap between the two sources, with no evidence in other countries. In a consistent way, art. L. 211 – 13 provides that the traveller can withdraw only as a result of changes to substantial elements of the services, and only the decree that followed 29 provided for the hypothesis in which, unable to meet the specific consumer requests accepted at the time of stipulation, the organiser may decide to restore the original plan. However, most important of all is the fact that with a consistent approach both in the ordonnance and in the Decree, the French law attributes the power of art. 11, paragraph 2, of the Directive also to the intermediary and not only to the organiser, and this is surprising both because the solution is different from the community indications and because it is not clear in what way and for what reasons the so-called détaillant should intervene. Overall, art. L. 211 – 13 is more concise compared to art. 11 of the Directive, thanks to the subsequent integration of the decree 30 , which acts on core points, such as the maximum price raising threshold. For example, the problem of the effects of silence is not taken into account which means that the same problems seen for the Italian version apply. Like Italy, Belgium has implemented the Community guidelines with the Loi relative à la vente de voyages à forfait, de prestations de voyages liées et de services de voyage of November 21, 2017. The power of changing in this law follows the provisions of the Directive. Article 24 regulates the less important amendments and variations, while articles 25 – 28 regulate the significant ones. The traveller’s silence is interpreted as non-acceptance and, therefore, as a 28 See art. R. 211 – 9 del décret n. 2017 – 1871 du 29 décembre 2017 pris pour l’application de l’ordonnance n. 2017 1717 du 20 décembre 2017 portant transposition de la directive 2015/2302/EU du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 25 novembre 2015 relative aux voyages à forfait et aux prestations de voyage liées. 29 See art. R. 211 – 9, del décret n. 2017 – 1871 du 29 décembre 2017 pris pour l’application de l’ordonnance n. 2017 1717 du 20 décembre 2017 portant transposition de la directive 2015/2302/EU du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 25 novembre 2015 relative aux voyages à forfait et aux prestations de voyage liées. 30 See art. R. 211 – 9, del décret n. 2017 – 1871 du 29 décembre 2017 pris pour l’application de l’ordonnance n. 2017 1717 du 20 décembre 2017 portant transposition de la directive 2015/2302/EU du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 25 novembre 2015 relative aux voyages à forfait et aux prestations de voyage liées.