Package Travel Directive - many issues addressed by the English courts all in one case: in the wake of Sherman v Reader Offers Ltd Stephen Mason1 1. Background facts. 2. Trial in the County Court. 3. First Appeal – the High Court. 4. Second Appeal – the Court of Appeal. a. Contract formation. b.Warning to passengers regarding the change of itinerary. c. Force majeure. d. Disclaimers. e. The ‘Flicker of Hope’ test. f. Damages and compensation. 5. Conclusion. The English Court of Appeal has clarified many difficult issues arising from the Package Travel Directive and Regulations, all in the one case of Sherman v Reader Offers Ltd 2024. The issues include: when a contract for a package holiday is formed, and what effect the PTD/PTRs have on the time when that happens; whether disclaimers can be effective in reducing the ambit of responsibility and legal liability of package organisers; when the unexpected remains foreseeable and therefore not force majeure; what precisely the package organiser must tell consumers if there is a significant change before departure, and when that should happen; and the correct approach to calculating damages/compensation. Keywords: Contract formation; package travel; disclaimers; flicker of hope; foreseeability; compensation principles, notifications. Lawyers have a saying that “hard cases make bad law”. There were times during the tortured history of the case of Sherman v Reader Offers Ltd (ROL) that it seemed that this maxim was going to apply in spades for the travel industry. DOI 10.60559/ijtthl2024-017 1, TravLaw, email: stephen@travlaw.co.uk.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==