Moreover, I would say that a lack of conformity becomes attributable to the traveller if – despite his obligation according to Article 13 (2) he failed to inform the organiser of the lack of conformity without undue delay and thus prevented the organiser from taking appropriate measures to remedy the lack of conformity. From the time when the lack of conformity could have been remedied if notice had been given the traveller shall therefore not be entitled to price reduction. "is supported by the observations of the CJEU, according to which a failure to communicate a lack of conformity to the organiser may be taken into account when determining the reduction in the price of that package where such notice could have reduced the duration of the lack of conformity perceived.35 If the traveller by his behaviour (being heavily drunk, molesting or endangering other travellers or suppliers’ sta%, breaking local laws or threatening public order at the destination) or condition (infectious disease) makes it unreasonable for the organiser to continue with the provision of the travel services, the resulting (partial) non-performance of these services will also be attributable to the traveller who therefore will not be entitled to price reduction in such cases.36 On the other hand, a lack of conformity caused by a third party unconnected with the provision of the travel services included in the package travel contract can still make the organiser liable to price reduction. If therefore relaxation in a hotel promised to be “quiet and peaceful” is disturbed by construction works from the neighbouring area, the traveller can claim for an appropriate price reduction.37 Even if the lack of conformity is due to unavoidable and extraordinary circumstances the traveller is entitled to price reduction.38 "is, for example, applies when a cruise ship cannot access a certain port because of weather conditions or when the booked accommodation cannot be provided because the hotel was destroyed by a Tsunami39 or a hurricane.40 35 CJEU judgment of 12 Jan. 2023 in case C-396/21- Tez Tour, margin 40. 36 See BGH judgment of 20 Jan. 2026, X ZR 15/25 37 OLG Celle (Higher Regional Court of Celle) order of 24 Oct. 2019, 11 U 132/19; LG Frankfurt/Main (Regional Court of Frankfurt/Main) judgment of 22 May 2019, 2-24 O 106/17. 38 CJEU judgment of 12 Jan. 2023 in case C-396/21- Tez Tour; Tonner, MüKo6 § 651c BGB Rn 18. 39 OGH 30.01.2007, 10 Ob 2/07b. 40 LG Klewe, RRa 2000, 100. 351 ARTICLE 14 | MICHAEL WUKOSCHITZ
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==