Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

958 COLLECTIVE COMMENTARY ABOUT THE NEW PACKAGE TRAVEL DIRECTIVE 3.10. In particular, as regards conditions other than price, the trader may stipulate in the contract that minor changes may be made; in addition, if he is “ obliged ”, he may also unilaterally make changes which substantially affect one of the main characteristics of the tourist service (e.g.: changes in the destination of the journey, itinerary and periods of stay, changes in the means of transport, departure or arrival times that cause the traveller inconvenience). From this point of view, the new rules do not seem to deviate from those previously provided in the Italian legislation, giving the trader, in accordance with the interpretation adopted by ICA in some cases, a chance to make changes exclusively in the hypothesis of “ the occurrence of exceptional circumstances or in any case of objective difficulties which the trader could not have avoided even if he had taken all the appropriate measures to ensure adequate organization and planning ” 11 . In the latter case, however, the traveller will be recognized the power to either accept the change proposed by the trader or to be fully refunded. 3.11. In the event of cancellation, the organiser may offer the traveller a replacement package of equivalent or higher quality or may grant a price reduction if the change results in a lower quality or cost package. If the alternative solution is not accepted, the organiser will refund without undue delay all payments made by or on behalf of the traveller, without prejudice to any compensation for damage. On this aspect, the new rules do not seem to deviate from the former legislation, giving the travellers the right to be informed on the alternative solutions before choosing the preferred one 12 . 4. CONCLUSIONS 4.1. In the light of the analysis carried out above, it may be concluded that ICA can assess a large part of the infringements laid down in the new legislation on the basis of the Consumer Code, insofar as such practices can be qualified as unfair commercial practices, in line with ICA’s previous decisions. 4.2. The revised legislation, in fact, does not prejudice the hypothesis of application of the Consumer Code to unfair commercial practices, so that – by 11 See, Tar Lazio Judgment, 14 march 2011, n. 2267; see also Consiglio di Stato Judgment, 19 january 2012, n. 209. 12 See, Consiglio di Stato Judgment, 30 april 2019, n. 2818; 8 july 2019, n. 4763;18 july 2017, n. 2017.