Blog
Travel agents can learn from a recent Supreme Court decision regarding the granting of a discount on the price of a tour as a result of a defect. Try to avoid such disputes - for example, by setting up a hotline or getting advice on problematic claims. Contact us!
During his stay, the travel agent's client repeatedly complained about the quality of the hotel's services - water not draining in the shower, monotonous and cold breakfast with limited choice, and the fact that the room is directly above the outdoor disco - noise until 11 pm. The client did not come to an agreement with the tour company and filed a lawsuit against them. The Court of First Instance found that the client was entitled to a discount on the price of the tour, namely for a breakfast offer that did not meet the expected standard of 5% (CZK 2,736.70), for non-draining water in the bathroom of 10% (CZK 5,473.40) and for increased noise of 10% (CZK 5,473.40). The Municipal Court denied the client a discount for the limited breakfast offer because a hot breakfast was not promised, because the description of the accommodation as "family" does not imply that it is a quiet location, and because the water coverage of the bathroom does not imply that it is non-functional, but the foregoing only supports the well-known fact that the humidity is much higher in seaside resorts, resulting in non-drying of the floor spaces. How did the Supreme Court view this great contradiction between the opinion of the District Court and the Municipal Court, which, incidentally, is encountered quite often in judgments?
First of all, the Municipal Court based its assessment of the content of the contract only on so-called "relevant information", which was wrong. It should be remembered that the primary determinant of whether or not a particular defect is a defect is the contract containing the specification of the tour, or the individual services (transport, accommodation, insurance, etc.), the catalogue (the offer) from which the customer draws specific information about the tour (the destination, the accommodation, including its location and description of the facilities, the services provided, etc.), and last but not least the pre-contractual information. It is only on the basis of a comprehensive assessment of all this information available to the customer at the time of conclusion of the contract that a conclusion can be drawn as to what assurances the tour operator has made regarding the characteristics of the tour, or as to the reasonableness of the customer's expectations.
As regards the cold kitchen, the Municipal Court's conclusion that there was no defect because the customer was not promised a hot meal as part of the breakfast does not stand. Even if it were true that cooked food or hot food (e.g. eggs) is not a normal part of a continental breakfast, if the establishment (the hotel) serves a breakfast with hot food as part of its service, there is no reason not to require a standard temperature.
Finally, with regard to water in the bathroom, while it is true that a wet floor where the shower is located will not constitute a defect in the tour, even if it is also a room used as a toilet, the difference between a 'wet floor' and a situation where the water does not 'drain' - that is, where the water remains 'standing' after the shower has been used - cannot be ignored, such a circumstance, even according to the Court of Appeal's deepest conviction, may constitute a certain discomfort, particularly from a hygienic point of view, especially if the bathroom is used by several persons and serves not only as a shower but also as a washroom and a toilet.
In a case such as this, where the Supreme Court has overturned the decision of the Court of Appeal, it will now be for the Municipal Court to reassess all the facts.
For travel agents, the length of the proceedings is also useful information from this dispute. The claimed tour took place between 19 August 2018 and 2 September 2018. The travel agent and its client have therefore been litigating for a relatively small amount in this case for almost four years and their dispute is clearly not yet over.
More articles:
Jasper Brinkman
Jasper Brinkman
"Following a devastating hotel fire in Prague, the law firm Holubová advokáti, led by attorney Klara Dvorakova, successfully represented our extended family as a group of victims. The firm navigated complex international insurance and compensation laws to defend our rights.
I would like to acknowledge the extraordinary efforts the firm had to make to bring our case to a successful compensation under extremely difficult circumstances."
Stewarts
Stewarts
"A visit to her daughter in London turned Eva's life upside down when she says she stepped into a crossing on a green light but was hit by a car. Despite her remarkable bravery, she faced a long treatment due to fractures in her pelvis, and the associated limitations and pain are likely to persist for the rest of her life. Regular headaches and impaired concentration compound her challenges.
Eva contacted us through an organization temporarily helping her manage her difficult living situation. At that time, she was destitute, relying only on subsistence payments. We were able to assist her because we specialize in personal injury and have contacts with proven colleagues abroad.
We worked with Stewarts, a UK law firm, on this case. Attorneys Klára Dvořáková and Rebecca Huxford helped Eva with the documentation in her case, explaining her options and the differences between the Czech and British systems of healthcare and social benefits reimbursement. Within a few months, thanks to the professional cooperation between the two offices, an offer of compensation from the insurance company of approximately CZK seven million was achieved. The client accepted this settlement because she did not want to deal with courts in the United Kingdom.
Subsequently, we assisted the client with related tax issues and contacted Auditone, a tax consultancy firm, which arranged for the filing of a tax return. Compensation for lost income is taxable, unlike most personal injury compensation.
'No one has done as much for me as you,' Eva said.
The fact that we were able to help Eva gives our work meaning and brings us great joy. We are very happy that, thanks to our many years of active involvement in the international professional organization PEOPIL, we can cooperate on such cases."