Collective Commentary about the New Package Travel Directive

994 COLLECTIVE COMMENTARY ABOUT THE NEW PACKAGE TRAVEL DIRECTIVE his obligations, have control over their activities and so on. For example, the organiser was held liable for the actions of the hotel, which provided accommodation services, not only meeting the standards usually found in three- -star hotels, but not even complying with the basic hygiene and sanitation requirements 34 . 3. ISSUES RELATED TO THE TRANSPOSITION OF THE PROVISIONS CONCERNING RATIONAE MATERIA OF THE TRAVEL DIRECTIVE (THE MATERIAL SCOPE OF APPLICATION) Article 2 of the Travel Directive lays down that the directive applies to packages offered for sale or sold by traders to travellers and linked travel arrangements facilitated by traders for travellers. The purchase of a travel service on a stand- -alone basis as a single travel service should constitute neither a package nor a linked travel arrangement (paragraph 15 of the preamble of the Travel Directive). Article 2 (2) of the Travel Directive establishes the exceptions to the application of the directive, which means that the EUMember States might decide to extend the application of the rules in this respect. However, Lithuanian legislators have decided to not include these exceptions to the regulation of travel services as exactly as in the directive. There were some discussions in the working group to include packages and linked travel arrangements, purchased based on a general agreement, for the arrangement of business travel between a trader and another natural or legal person, acting for purposes regarding trade, business, craft or profession; however, it was finally decided that this inclusion would not be proportional 35 . The amendments of Lithuanian laws do not straightforwardly indicate what kind of legal norms are applied to the purchase of a travel service on a stand- -alone basis as a single travel service, even though these services are obviously regulated by other legal norms of the Civil Code. It does not create uncertainties for the courts. The Supreme Court of Lithuania analysed this issue, in the case, in which the defendant, according to the facts, sold accommodation services provided by hotels to persons, at their request, i.e. acted as an intermediary for 34 The ruling of the Supreme Court of Lithuania, 10 of May 2010, case No. 3K-3-201/2010. 35 Salvija Mulevičienė; Edmundas Rusinas. The problems of Transposition of Travel Directive into national law and its implementation. Jurisprudence, 2019, 26 (1), p. 202-203.