Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

226 COLLECTIVE COMMENTARY ABOUT THE NEW PACKAGE TRAVEL DIRECTIVE access this information via a hyperlink would not satisfy the requirement that the information must be “given to” or “received” by the consumer, because clicking on it would require a consumer to take an active step 45 . In consequence, the lack of consumer protection was consolidated with the new Package Travel Directive as it permitted the organiser to make any change to pre-contractual information easily and at a low cost by using new technologies. In this way, regrettably, the policy was adopted to the detriment of the traveller. As a result, the traveller will not be able to ensure that essential information posted on a website regarding the contract will not be unilaterally changed by the organiser or retailer before concluding the contract. Yet the lack of protection is not exclusive to package travel contracts and a durable medium was not required for pre-contractual information provided in distance contracts either 46 . 45 In contrast to this, email messages would be a durable medium according to recital (23) CRD, yet there is little difference between clicking on a hyperlink and opening an email message. Regarding this, Howells, Twigg- -Flesner and Wilhelmsson consider this to be a rather strict approach. Ibid ; yet the same opinion observes that Arts. 5 to 8 CRD uses the word “provided”, which entails that a consumer cannot be required to take an active step to access the information. 46 See Arts. 6 and 8 CRD. A durable medium was required only as for pre-contractual information in off- -premises contracts (Art. 7(1) CRD) and regarding the confirmation of the distance contract concluded (Art. 8(7) CRD); see also Art. 4(1) and (2) and Art. 5(1) of the Timeshare Directive.