Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

ARTICLE 3 | MARC MC DONALD 175 … In any event a first response shall be issued at the latest within 15 working days from receiving the request.”. It is significant that a pro-active obligation is imposed on MS. They have to go and find out the position, rather than wait for the non-local organiser to resolve those doubts. No standard forms for facilitating requesting/providing information between contact points are set out in Directive 2015/2302. The amount of organiser-specific information which must be disclosed by the MS of the organisers/facilitators establishment to address doubts is not listed – there may be commercial secrecy and personal data issues involved – which may cause difficulties. Further, the legal authority of a regulator to seek security-information from the non-local organiser/facilitator is not clearly dealt with, which one assumes seems to mean that local law can provide that authority, though any penalty for non-compliance must not infringe the principle of mutual recognition of security. Nor is the question of a local regulator posting on its website information to the effect that the security provided by a non-local organiser is provided in another MS under its local law. The administration of the mutual recognition of security instruments will pose significant challenges. MS who do not have bodies readily identifiable as central contact points will have to establish them and these could be sited anywhere within administrative frameworks responsible for transport, consumer protection, justice or others. MS like Ireland who already have regulators seem likely to designate them as central points of contact. It is not difficult to imagine that these central contact points will face considerable challenges in building up their resources and organising working links with each other. Among the challenges will be: – determining that non-local entity selling in its territory is sufficiently connected to the entity that has the approved security in the MS of establishment – not a new challenge – being satisfied that the modalities for gaining access to and making claims against the security exist and will be available at short notice, and – potentially, devising common formats of communication so that information exchanged is standardised and comprehensible It is perhaps a hindrance that no legal authority is given by Directive 2015/2302 for the making of codes or guidance notes on communication between central contact points, though if problems emerge in this area the overall report on the transposition and operation of the Directive due under Article 26 by 1.1. 2021 can address them.