Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

LITHUANIA | DANGUOLĖ BUBLIENĖ AND IEVA NAVICKAITĖ-SAKALAUSKIENĖ 981 organiser becomes insolvent; organiser’s liability for the performance of all travel services that are part of the package; clear information for travellers; price modifications allowed only in very specific circumstances, etc. Thus, in the case of linked travel arrangements, the protection of travellers is focused solely on insolvency protection and information requirements. These new “two-speed” protection rules were not familiar to Lithuanian law, since Lithuania did not have national legal traditions in the field of consumer protection and the national consumer law was based on transposed EU consumer protection rules, e.g. old Travel Directive. In this context, it is important to stress that till 2002 the directives, adopted in the consumer protection field, had a minimum harmonisation character. Based on a minimum harmonisation clause, EUMember States are allowed to introduce or maintain more stringent consumer protection rules (consumer protection rules that exceed the level of protection offered by the particular directive). The policy shift fromminimum harmonisation to full harmonisation was announced, in 2002, by Communication on the Consumer policy strategy 2002-2006 of May 2002, and it was immediately put into effect with the 2002 Directive on distance marketing of financial services 7 . This shift continued its way in other consumer protection directives, which have been adopted after 2002, inter alia in generally applicable directives 8 . The Travel Directive was not an exception. Together, with full harmonisation principle, the focus of the directives adopted in consumer protection field shifted from the high level of consumer protection to the better conditions for competition in cross-border trade: with aim to abolish legal diversity, seeking to find the compromise between interests of the consumers and businesses (especially small and medium-sized businesses). The Travel Directive also reflects this idea. As explained in the paragraph 5 of the preamble of the Directive, the harmonisation of the rights and obligations, arising from contracts relating to package travel and linked travel arrangements, is necessary for the creation of a real consumer internal market in that area, 7 Marco M. B. Loos. Full harmonisation as a regulatory concept and its consequences for the national legal orders. The example of the Consumer rights directive. Centre for the Study of European Contract Law, Working Paper Series No. 2010/03, p. 6. 8 For instance, in Directive 2005/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 May 2005, concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market, and amending Council Directive 84/450/EEC, Directives 97/7/EC, 98/27/EC and 2002/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Regulation (EC) No. 2006/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (‘Unfair Commercial Practices Directive’); Directive 2011/83/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 on consumer rights, amending Council Directive 93/13/EEC and Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Council Directive 85/577/EEC and Directive 97/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council.