Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

346 COLLECTIVE COMMENTARY ABOUT THE NEW PACKAGE TRAVEL DIRECTIVE but are the reason for travelling: “ newness rather than sameness is the essence of tourism ” 7 . If the continuation of the trip becomes unreasonable because of events like terrorist threats, pandemic outbreaks, outbreaks of a civil war or similar, a distinction has to be made with regard to whether the particular event had been foreseeable at the time of booking. If it had been foreseeable, it can neither be regarded a “lack of conformity” nor an “extraordinary circumstance” because the traveller had (at least: implicitly) accepted the risk when concluding the contract. If it had not been foreseeable and there is a real hazard and not only a subjective perception of such hazard, such event can constitute a lack of conformity – at least if it occurs at the traveller’s destination or its immediate vicinity 8 . I. PRICE REDUCTION 1. General Remarks In case of a lack of conformity, Article 14 (1) provides for a right to an appropriate price reduction for the period affected by the lack of conformity. This concept of price reduction has a long tradition in Austrian and German law and has led to extensive case law. 2. Calculation of the Reduction In the 1980s, the 24 th Civil Chamber of the Regional Court of Frankfurt/Main has developed a scheme for the assessment of an appropriate price reduction. The scheme is based on the chamber’s respective judgements but not quoting any of these judgements. It has become famous as the “Frankfurt List” 9 and is assigning certain percentages of price reduction to typical kinds of lack of performance (like delay of the flight, lower category of the hotel, dirty room, spoiled food, etc.). The following short excerpt may give a close idea: 7 John Downes , IFTTA Journal of Travel and Tourism Law 12/00, 29. 8 See Article 12 (2) of the Directive. 9 Published in NJW 1985, 113.