A WICKED DEED’S CURSE 8) CONCLUSIONS Although the case in the United Kingdom has now been decided on the merits, it is difficult to draw generally valid conclusions from it regarding the liability of the package organiser. On the one hand, this is due to the fact that the PTD 2015 has come into force in the meantime, which has also partially redefined the liability of the package organiser, but on the other hand, it is also due to the fact that the relevant question of which acts or omissions of an employee of a service supplier are to be regarded as part of the provision of travel services has not been submitted to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling. The courts of the EU member states can therefore still come to different conclusions, whereby the decisions of the British lower courts also show that this issue can certainly be judged differently from the UK Supreme Court. Ultimately, a new referral to the CJEU will therefore be necessary in order to create clarity throughout the Union. Reference list: Weimar, W. (1982), ‘Haftet der Schuldner für Gelegenheitshandlungen seines Erfüllungsgehilfen?‘, Juristische Rundschau 1982/3, p. 95 Chapman, M., Prager, S., Harding, J., Smith, D. Yarrow, T., Soede, H. (eds), Saggerson on Travel Law and Litigation. 7th London, Wildy, Simmonds & Hill.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==