Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

664 COLLECTIVE COMMENTARY ABOUT THE NEW PACKAGE TRAVEL DIRECTIVE newly-created “linked travel arrangements” were considered far too complex. The whole booking process, especially the standard information forms, was seen as creating an excessively heavy burden on travel professionals, especially small and medium-sized travel providers. Belgium voted against the PTD. The new Law hasn’t originated extensive case-law (yet), as some predicted. Part of the reason is probably that most (traditional) travel providers were very well informed in advance by their trade associations about the practical consequences of the Law and have adapted their business models accordingly. However, there is still a lot of confusion among professionals and consumers about the exact scope of the law. For example, in too many cases it is unclear when a travel contract is a package, a linked travel arrangement or none of them. Similarly, travel agents ignore which standard information form they must provide to their customer in given circumstances and often struggle to comply with their precontractual and contractual information duties. Some professionals (such as hotels, restaurants, theme parks, historical sites, carriers, public authorities…) still fail to realize that they potentially fall under the application of the Law and too many others have found creative ways to simply escape the application of the law. The notion and exact scope of the “general agreement”, which under Article 2 point 2 of the PTD excludes business travel, is unclear. These (and other) questions create legal uncertainty. Future court cases in the European Union and a possible review by the European Commission will hopefully help to interpret and further explain the PTD, but for the time being this legislation creates significant challenges for practitioners all over Europe. 3. This short contribution will not examine the content of the Law of 21 November 2017, which is largely a literal transposition of the maximum harmonisation PTD, but will specifically focus on the aspects where the Belgian legislator has decided to deviate from the PTD. 2. WHERE DOES THE BELGIAN LAW DEVIATE FROM THE PTD? 4. As we know, the PTD leaves little flexibility to the national legislator, as no rules can be introduced in national law that are stricter than those set in the directive. Yet the national legislator remains competent, under EU law, to maintain or introduce rules corresponding to the provisions of the directive, with regard to contracts which do not strictly fall under its scope.