Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

NETHERLANDS | NICK DE LEEUW | JUDITH TERSTEEG | FRANK RADSTAKE 1067 has suffered due to the cancellation of the trip in case of non-standardised termination fees. Is he also allowed to consider any lost profits as damage? Opinions tend to differ on this. Unfortunately, the Dutch legislator does not discuss this in the Explanatory Memorandum. The phrase “income from alternative use” is somewhat odd, as, naturally, each trip can only be sold once. Even though the organiser can ultimately offer the cancelled trip to other travellers, these other travellers would perhaps have booked another trip with this same organiser. After all, if the first choice of a traveller is not available, he will most likely simply book a suitable alternative. This means that there is actually no cost savings or income from alternative use for the organiser. We believe that the organiser is entitled to the fully lost margin on the trip and any costs paid in advance. The organiser often has to pay the hotel before the start of the trip, and airlines demand full payment from the organiser when a reservation is finalised. The organiser will often lose this expenditure in case of cancellation. 9. CONCLUSION We conclude that the Dutch legislator has strictly observed the Dutch version (!) of the Directive. It is unfortunate that this means that a number of shortcomings present in the Dutch version of the Directive have ended up in the Dutch Act. The Dutch Act is moreover a faithful translation of the wish of the EU legislator to materially offer the same protection to travellers in all Member States. It will become clear in the coming years whether this has been successful. The Directive, and correspondingly the Dutch Act, is not clear on a number of aspects and difficult to explain to the traveller. The definitions are difficult to read and the demarcation between a package and a linked travel arrangement can only be slightly understood after repeated reading, and the demarcation between a linked travel arrangement and a single travel service without any form of protection is even more difficult to explain. We wonder if the very extensive information requirement does not overshoot the mark. A website user will often blindly accept all conditions because he knows he cannot continue without checking a box or acceptance and would be unable to book a trip (just like an Apple, Google, Facebook or Instagram user will be unable to continue without checking a box for acceptance). The amount of mandatory information is alienating the user.