In most cases, the list is indicating a frame of percentages for the appropriate price reduction rather than a single number. Immediately after its publication, the Frankfurt List was heavily criticized as being far too schematical and not taking into regard the broad variety of cases.19 Applying the list could infringe justice in the individual case. A lot of German courts therefore explicitly refused to apply the Frankfurt List.20 Meanwhile a lot of other price reduction lists have been published like a Kempten List,21 a Mainz List,22 a Vienna List23 and others more.24 "ese lists di%er from the Frankfurt List in so far as they are referring to particular judgements which are quoted by their !le numbers and therefore allow to look up the particular circumstances of the respective cases. Other than the Frankfurt List, they are updated regularly. However, all these lists have been regarded as not being any kind of legal source and therefore are not binding for the courts.25 "eir main purpose is merely to provide a rough orientation on what percentage of price reduction might be appropriate. "e CJEU’s view that the price reduction solely serves to restore the contractual balance requires national courts to exercise sound judgement in each case as the price reduction must correspond to the value of the services for which a lack of conformity has been found and the assessment of whether a price reduction is appropriate must be carried out objectively, which also precludes a schematical application of any lists or tables.26 Apart from particular cases where it may be reasonable to leave the calculation of the appropriate price reduction to an expert, in Austrian and German court practice, the amount granted usually is subject to judicial discretion. In principle, the full package price serves as the calculation base for the price reduction.27 Booking fees of retailers or costs of travel insurances, however, do not form parts of the package price and therefore are not subject to the price reduction.28 19 Müller-Langguth, NJW 1985, 900 and 1887. 20 OLG Hamburg, NJW 1985, 3030; LG München 12.02.1987, 31 S 14640/86; OLG Celle 24.05.1995, 11 U 144/94; 21 Recent update available at https://reiserechtfuehrich.!les.wordpress.com/2018/07/kemptener-tab-7-20182.pdf. 22 First published by Kaller, Reiserecht [1999]. 23 Lindinger, Wiener Liste zur Reisepreisminderung3 [2016]; most recent update in ZVR 2018/118. 24 Including a „Würzburg List“ regarding price reduction for cruises, available at https://würzburger-tabelle.de/. 25 OGH 03.11.2005, 6 Ob 419/03v; Wukoschitz, Reisepreisminderungsmythos “Frankfurter Tabelle”, RdW 2006, 488. 26 Likewise: OLG Celle (Higher Regional Court of Celle) judgment of 15 Oct. 2020, 11 U 175/19, RRa 2021, 62. 27 Tonner, MüKo6 § 651d BGB Rn 19; HG Wien (Commercial court Vienna) judment of 5 Dec. 2024, 50 R 179/24. 28 HG Wien (Commercial Court Vienna) judgment of 24 May 2004, 50 R 39/04y. 349 ARTICLE 14 | MICHAEL WUKOSCHITZ
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==