Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

FINLAND | MIKKO LAAKSO 791 would be a travel package within the meaning of the Act on combinations of travel services even though the contracts are separate if there are two different types of travel services. In a second exemplar situation trader C, who specializes in the sale of travel accessories sets up a web store and opens cross selling to A and B of the previous example. The consumer will then be able to obtain products/services from all three traders at one time, with the result that the combination of travel services might be formed at any time depending on what kind of services the consumer is purchasing. A scenario where the consumer chooses a product from all three traders for the same holiday trip forms a travel package out of A’s and B’s travel services. Although the accessory sold by C is purchased for the same trip at the same time as the A’s and B’s travel services, it cannot be included in the travel package as it is not a travel service defined in the NPTD. Regarding the examples described above, it remains somewhat unclear which entity can be considered to be the tour operator responsible for the execution of the trip. If we consistently adopt the above interpretation, which looks at the consumer’s legitimate perception and perception of the responsible party, then it may be justifiable to consider the web shop operator to be the responsible tour operator. However, this could easily lead to a rather disproportionate result if, as in the latter example C, who does not itself provide travel services defined at the NPTD, were to become the responsible tour operator with all the obligations as a result of dynamic cross selling. However, as a site owner C can decide over what type of travel services he offers through his shop. Thus, C may not be completely unaware of the situation whereby consumers can purchase combinations of travel services to be interpreted as travel packages or LTAs without his knowledge. From the consumer’s point of view it should be considered that an e-commerce operator must be the responsible tour operator in dynamic cross selling, unless he designates another trader to act as a tour operator when providing and selling travel services within the scope of the NPTD. This sort of arrangement could be based on agreements between traders. Unilateral notification is unlikely to be effective if traders have not agreed among themselves about the responsibilities of the tour operator. Through the examples above, it must be concluded that the use of web stores allowing dynamic cross selling does not in itself mean that the trader will be a tour operator or a facilitator of the acquisition of combined travel arrangements. On the other hand, dynamic cross selling significantly increases the chances of enabling the creation of travel packages and LTAs with traders who provide only