Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

498 COLLECTIVE COMMENTARY ABOUT THE NEW PACKAGE TRAVEL DIRECTIVE Belgium approved the Law on the sale of package travel, linked travel arrangements and travel services on 21 November 2017 21 . This law has a significant coverage of situations of non-conformity with rules of the Directive in chapter 3, articles 79 to 81, punishing the most important infractions with criminal penalties and fines up to €50,000.00. The maximum applicable fine can be doubled if the person reoffends within five years of the date of a final conviction, for the same infringement 22 . In Belgium this kind of infringements is punished with criminal penalties, in a clearly legalistic type of enforcement 23 . The powers to investigate and prosecute the infringements to the law are given to the local and federal police, as well as the officials designated by the Ministry of Economy, article 82. Article 54 of Belgian law provides a security for refund of paid amounts for non-performed services as consequent of insolvency of organisers and retailers and of organisers, not established in a Member State. The conditions and form that this security must meet shall be determined by the King, according to article 60. In Spain, powers to rule for penalties were transferred from central state to the Autonomous Communities. On certain issues, the nature of Spanish State concedes legislative powers to the Autonomous Communities which can create law and, on this case, transpose directives. This solution provokes some kind of uncertainty and legal insecurity, insofar as 17 completely different regimes of the same legal relationship can coexist in the same Member State. Spanish transposition was the last one coming into force 24 and there are not yet legal instruments issued by the Autonomous Communities to address these provisions. The same is true of the public entity empowered to control and enforce legal compliance. Article 164 of Spanish law requires organisers and retailers to set securities in order to protect travellers on their right to refund of paid amounts for non- -performed services as consequent of insolvency of organisers and retailers and repatriation. The state law doesn’t specify the nature of the security; it just says 21 Loi relative à la vente de voyages à forfait, de prestations de voyage liées et de services de voyage. 22 For instance, if the trader does not provide security for the refund of all payments already made by or on behalf of travellers insofar as the relevant services are not performed as a consequence of their insolvency, or fail on the repatriation obligation, etc. 23 The powers given to the local and federal police in order to investigate and prosecute the infractions are examples of this type of enforcement. 24 Real Decreto-ley 23/2018, de 21 de diciembre, de transposición de directivas en materia de marcas, transporte ferroviario y viajes combinados y servicios de viaje vinculados.