Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

ARTICLE 10 | CHIARA TINCANI 261 and only if the contract expressly (.) reserves the possibility of such a price increase” 18 . This motivation does not add much and suggests the preference for a tighter regulation of the sector, without the application of the general principles of each country on the effects of negotiation and, therefore, of the respective contract theory. One could argue about the need for such meticulous regulation for the creation of an open market and for a balanced competition. If the idea of the two European texts and, in particular, the latest one is to provide equal provisions for all operators, this translates into long-winded norms, with analytical references to different factual situations and with the deliberate intent to strictly condition and regulate the work of countries, forcing them to consider only European law, without any additions and without any integration and syntheses with their own national laws on contracts. If we want harmonization because “disparities in the rules protecting travellers in different Member States act as a disincentive for travellers in one Member State (…) from buying packages and linked travel arrangements in another Member State” and, likewise, are “a disincentive for organisers and retailers in one Member State from selling such services in another Member State ” 19 , the coming closer of these prescriptions takes place with a technique inspired by the principle of maximum detail, as demonstrated by articles 10 and 11. This has implications on the criteria of interpretation to be applied to the European text, so that its spirit is further reinforced and States are compelled to adhere to precise indications referring to many empirical events, directly listed and described. Although this option on the method of interpretation is clear and solid, the strategy underlying the two Directives is not very convincing. On the one hand, one should not take for granted the fact that harmonisation 20 presupposes attention to single cases and such a detailed regulation structure, which can multiply doubts, instead of solving them. On the other hand, one may question whether intra-Community competition is supported by complete prescriptive consistency on the nature and effects of the contract. There can be doubts on this issue, because only a part of the provisions has a direct impact on the companies’ expectation in terms of revenues. Lastly, the prohibition against the 18 See Directive 2015/2302/EU, 33rd whereas clause. 19 See Directive 2015/2302/EU, 6th whereas clause. 20 See Morandi, The new European regulation of package travel and linked travel arrangements, in Dir. trasp., 2017, 103 and following, according to which “the choice made by the European legislator goes in the direction of a politically controversial full harmonization approach, that will create real difficulties in the implementation of the new rules in the legislation of the different Countries”.