Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

LITHUANIA | DANGUOLĖ BUBLIENĖ AND IEVA NAVICKAITĖ-SAKALAUSKIENĖ 1015 of the newTravel Directive, some of the Civil Code provisions reflected Directive on Consumer Rights are applicable now for the package travel agreements. These uncertainties do not allow to treat the sanction system safeguarding the rights of the traveller as coordinated and complete. Therefore, it raises some doubts on whether the effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties exist in Lithuanian legislation as required by the Travel Directive and whether the ‘sanction rule’ is properly implemented in Lithuanian law. 7. CONCLUSIONS Legal provisions establishing rules on package travel and linked travel arrangements in the Lithuanian legal system were integrated into national legislation. As two main instruments, implementing the provisions of the Travel Directive became newly revised the Civil Code provisions and the Law on Tourism. Notwithstanding that the transposition technique of the new Travel Directive remained the same, as in the case of the preceding directive, the transposition process was not as smooth as might be expected at first glance. The analysis of national regulation has proved that ‘copy out’ technique was not the main transposition way of the Travel Directive into the national legislation; consequently, inaccuracies and errors were not avoided. It seems that most difficulties derived from and were related to the maximum harmonisation nature of the Directive. The ‘consumer-traveller’ dilemma, the concept of “tour organiser”, the separation of package travel from the linked services arrangements and the effectiveness of the protective measures (insolvency protection) might be distinguished as the most controversial points, which have raised difficulties in the transposition of the provisions of the Travel Directive process. Additionally, it might further impede the ability of national courts and non-judicial authorities to apply the national norms consistent with the regime, established by Travel Directive. The jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Lithuania enables to reasonably claim that although the national practice reacts appropriately to the changing social reality, after the adoption of the Travel Directive, the national practice will not avoid changes, especially regarding the duty to provide information and claims on damage compensation.