ECJ judgment on package tours: money back due to corona restrictions

Anyone who was surprised by Corona restrictions while on vacation has the right to have the tour operator reimburse part of the costs. The ECJ has now decided that.

March 2020: The corona virus has arrived in Europe, the EU countries are trying to take drastic measures to contain the spread. Also on the holiday island of Gran Canaria. A curfew is imposed here. Tourists are no longer allowed on the beach. Hotels close their pools, block off lobby areas. Vacationers are only allowed to leave their rooms to eat.

Right in the middle a married couple from Germany. It had booked a package tour to the Canary Island from mid to late March 2020 – i.e. starting the trip at a time when Corona was already an issue, but there were still no legal restrictions in everyday life in Europe. But that changed the day after arriving on site.

“No vacation, just stress”

You should have stayed in your room and only made calls, says the plaintiff. A local travel SOS hotline asked holidaymakers to be ready at all times for a possible return journey so that they could be at the airport within an hour.

“It was absolutely no vacation, just stress,” says the plaintiff. Of the two weeks booked on Gran Canaria, he and his wife only spent one week on site, mostly in their hotel room, until they were able to leave early.

That’s why they wanted part of their money back from the tour operator – and only pay 30 percent of the tour price. But the organizers refused. In court, he argued that he was not responsible for the Spanish government’s corona measures. It was about the realization of a general life risk for which he was not responsible.

Consumer-friendly verdict

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has now made a consumer-friendly judgment in this case. Thereafter, the following applies: If a package tour has been impaired due to Corona measures, holidaymakers may be entitled to a reduction in the travel price.

According to the EU Package Travel Directive, tour operators are liable regardless of whether it is their fault that they were not able to offer the travel service as promised.

It is also irrelevant that there were restrictions due to Corona not only at the travel destination on Gran Canaria, but also at the couple’s place of residence and in other countries.

What’s next?

The couple’s case is now going back to the Munich Regional Court, which had submitted the matter to the ECJ. It must then assess to what extent the restrictions mean that the tour operator has not provided the service promised – and how much of the travel price it must therefore pay back to the plaintiff. For example, the hotel pool was closed, there was no animation program, beaches were not allowed and it was not possible to visit the island.

The ECJ has pointed out that tour operators not only have the obligations that are expressly stated in the contract, but also those that are related to it and result from the destination of the trip.

When cancellations are possible

It’s not the first time a court has had to deal with the rights of travelers during the pandemic. The constellations are different. In many cases, consumers did not even start the trip, but canceled it because of the pandemic.

When holidaymakers cancel a package tour, tour operators usually charge cancellation fees. Free cancellation is only possible in exceptional cases: if “extraordinary circumstances” occur at or near the destination that “significantly affect” the package tour.

BGH: Pandemic “extraordinary circumstance”

Last summer, the Federal Court of Justice ruled on the case of a senior citizen who had booked a Danube cruise for the end of June in January 2020. At the beginning of June, she canceled the trip on the advice of her family doctor because she had often had problems with pneumonia. From the point of view of the Federal Court of Justice, she does not have to pay the travel price, even though the cruise took place with an adapted hygiene concept.

Because the corona pandemic is an “extraordinary circumstance” that can significantly affect a package tour. From the point of view of the judges in Karlsruhe, the fact that the pandemic prevailed worldwide – and not just at the travel destination – does not change this assessment.

In the specific case, the woman’s health was unreasonably endangered. The spatial conditions on board a river cruise ship played a role in this assessment, but also the fact that there was no vaccination option in June 2020 and no therapies against Covid-19 either. In addition, the over 80-year-old was part of a risk group because of her age and previous illness.

Another constellation lies with the ECJ. The question is to what extent circumstances that occurred later – such as a travel warning – must be taken into account for a free cancellation.