however, this period may not be sufficient to examine all registered claims. A fixed deadline therefore seems questionable, and it would be better to stick to the current approach of a refund “without undue delay”.43 The member states shall be allowes to require retailers to take out insolvency protection in addition to organisers where this is justified in light of payments received by retailers. However, if payments received by the retailer are attributed to the organiser anyway,44 the risk of insolvency of the retailer lies solely with the organiser and there is no need to protect travellers in this respect. On the other hand, the Commission’s plan to also look into the protection of passengers in the event of insolvency of air carriers and major crisis in the context of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 (Air Services Regulation) doesn’t seem to have made any progress and is not part of the Commission Proposal.45 1.6. Redress of the organiser Article 22 PTD 2015 states Member States shall ensure that the organiser (or retailer) has the right to seek redress from any third parties which contributed to an event triggering compensation, price reduction or other obligations of the organiser (or retailer) under the Directive. It is unclear whether this Article provides for a separate legal basis for redress claims or just refers to redress rights under general contract law of the Member States. The Commission Proposal suggests adding a second paragraph according to which Member States shall also ensure that service providers who cancel or fail to provide a service that is part of a package reimburse the organiser within 7 days all payments made by the organiser for the service. This 7-day period shall start on the day following the cancellation of the service or the day when the service was due to be performed, whichever is the earlier date.46 This deadline is related to the organiser’s obligation to reimburse the traveller within 14 days in case of a termination of the contract.47 However, this obligation of the organiser goes far beyond the amount paid for a particular service. Firstly, the problem remains that Article 22 is not mandatory and service providers, especially if they are the stronger party to the contract, can easily 43 Article 17(5) PTD 2015. 44 See Austrian Supreme Court (OGH) judgment of 28.10.1997, 4Ob276/97k. 45 Critical of this too: Tonner, Vorschlag der Kommission zur Ändrung der Reise-RL – Insolvenzabsicherung (Art. 17), RRa 2024, 179; Wukoschitz, Insolvency protection for package holidays – development, CJEU case law and the new Commission Proposal, ERA Forum 04/2025, 149. 46 Article 22(2) CP 2023 PTD. 47 Article 12(4) PTD 2015. 12 MICHAEL WUKOSCHITZ
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==