Keywords: Strict liability; package travel; burden of proof; travel organiser’s liability; Cour de cassation; French tourism law; non‑performance of contractual services; hotel change; optional services; canoeing accident; Article 23 Law no. 92‑645; Article L. 211‑17 Code du tourisme; Article 1315 Civil Code; Article 700 Code of Civil Procedure. I. INTRODUCTION The judgment of the First Civil Chamber of the French Supreme Court (Cour de cassation), delivered on 7 January 2026, concerns the travel agency’s strict liability (responsabilité de plein droit) for a fatal accident that occurred during a leisure activity - a canoe outing - at a hotel in Mauritius, within the framework of a package. The lawsuit was brought by the consorts A and his son B, following the disappearance of C (A’s wife and B’s mother) and D (A’s daughter and B’s sister). The plaintiffs sued the tour organiser, the hotel’s owner and management companies, and their respective insurers in the High Court. In August 1996, the mother concluded a contract with the travel agency Selectour for a voyage à forfait (package) organised by the tour operator Rev’Vacances, covering travel for herself and her two children, to Mauritius from 8 to 17 August 1996, with accommodation provided exclusively at the hotel “Le Mauricia”. On 15 August, after staying at hotel “Le Mauricia”, the mother and her children went to the hotel “Le Paradis”, owned by New Mauritius Hotels Ltd and managed by Beachcomber Ltd, which offered canoeing to its guests. On 16 August 1996, the mother and the daughter went for a canoe trip on the lagoon; they did not return to the hotel and were never found. In 2006, A and B brought an action for liability and damages against the travel agency, its insurer MMA IARD, and the companies New Mauritius Hotels and Beachcomber. The travel agency joined Axa France IARD, the tour operator their insurer, as a third party. The dispute had already led to a first cassation (2nd Civil Chamber, 8 September 2022, no. 21‑10.832). The Paris Court of Appeal, ruling on remand, delivered a judgment on 8 February 2024, which is now partially quashed by the present decision. 46 CARLOS TORRES
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==