REFUND FOR CANCELLED TRAVEL DURING THE PANDEMIC: COMMISSION DECIDES TO REFER SLOVAKIA TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to assess the conformity of the Slovak solutions with regard to refunds for cancelled travels and their conformity with EU law, i.e. the Package Travel Directive. In the article, the position is analysed of the European Commission and its reflection to Slovak legislation on refunds of travels after cancellation of the breach concerning travels by the travel agencies. Method. Legal analyses regarding the Slovak amendment of Package Travel Act and comparison of its provisions with the Package Travel Directive. Findings. In the article, the way is described as to how the Slovak legislator solved the reimbursement for cancelled travels due to pandemic situation. Also provided is the statement regarding the reasoned opinion of the European Commission that followed the adoption of the amendment of the Slovak Package Travel Act. The authors analyse compatibility of the COVID PTA Amendment with European Union law. In the article, it is described that due to time constraints set by the COVID PTA Amendment for refund because of cancelled travels, non-compliance with EU legislation had probably expired by September 2021. Research and conclusions limitations. The research was focused on EU (Package Travel Directive) and Slovak legislation (Package Travel Act) and assessment of compliance of Slovak with EU law. Practical implications. The article draws attention to the question whether some effects of the COVID PTA Amendment will persist after September 2021 provided that the topical purpose of this legislation to postpone refund for travellers has already been accomplished by setting the deadline for 14 September 2021. Secondly, it raises the question of possible damage suffered by the individuals due to the breach of EU law by the Slovak Republic. Originality. As the article is focused on the most current situation, this topic has not been discussed by other authors in other studies. The authors assume a view that makes assessment regarding legality of the Slovak amendment for Package Travel Act with EU law. Type of paper. Research paper.

THE ISSUES OF EVIDENCE FACILITATION IN THE REGULATION OF PACKAGE TRAVEL AND HOTEL SERVICES IN THE CONTEXT OF PROTECTING TRAVELLERS AND TOURISTS

Purpose. The aim of the article is to show the significance and diversity of legal constructions concerning the facilitations of proof in provisions regulating package travel and hotel services in the context of protecting travellers and tourists. Method. Analysis regarding the regulation of package travel and hotel services including the facilitations of proof are carried out using the formal-dogmatic and legal comparison method. The comparative method has a significant meaning for the proper interpretation of provisions regulating package travel and hotel services due to the interpenetration of national and international regulations. In the process of recreating norms from legal provisions, it is therefore helpful to analyse their similarities and differences. Findings. The provisions regulating package travel and hotel services include the facilitations of proof which improve the legal situation of travellers and tourists, as well as ensuring their protection. Research and conclusions limitations. There is no comprehensive study on facilitations of proof in the regulation of package travel and hotel services in literature on the subject. Practical implications. Conclusions resulting from the article will allow to determine the proper nature of the provisions referring to the facilitations of proof in the regulation of package travel and hotel services, which will enable their proper application in practice. Originality. The issue of the facilitations of proof in the regulation of package travel and hotel services has not been comprehensively researched so far. Type of work. Problem article.

The Tango Between Art.17(3) Brussels Ibis and Art.6(4)(b) Rome I under the Beat of Package Travel Directive

Package travel tourists are explicitly protected as consumers under Article 6(4)(b) Rome I, but not under Article 17(3) Brussels Ibis since it does not even mention the term ‘package travel’. Such discrepancy is widened with the replacement of Directive 90/314 by Directive 2015/2302 with enlarged notion of package travel. As regards protecting package travel tourists as consumers with favorable jurisdiction and applicable law rules, this article argues that Article 17(3) Brussels Ibis is two steps behind Article 6(4)(b) Rome I. In order to close the gap, a uniform concept of package travel should be given. To this end, it is suggested that Article 17(3) Brussels Ibis should adopt the notion of package travel employed in Article 6(4)(b) Rome I. Despite this, these two provisions only cover packages containing transport, as an exception of transport contracts. Packages not including transport do not fall under the exception of transport contracts. Since all package travel contracts should be protected as consumer contracts, regardless of containing transport or not, it is more logical to delete the exception of transport contracts and create a separate provision to protect package travel contracts as consumer contracts.

TURISTIČKO PUTOVANjE PREMA NOVOM SRPSKOM ZAKONU O ZAŠTITI POTROŠAČA

In September 2021. the Republic of Serbia adopted the new Law on consumer protection which, on the one hand, represents a step further in harmonization of the Serbian consumer rights with the consumer rights of EU while, on the other hand it is also on advanced step in better quality of protection of Serbian consumers, bearing in mind the specific issues in Serbian legistature in general and the needs and the situation in practice. A part of this law deals also with the protection of consumers in a chieving their rights from the agreement on tourst travel. The Law on consumer protection (2021) implements Directive EU on package travel and linked travel arrangements (2015/2302). In addition to the harmonization required, as the travel service market experiences significant changes, especially because of the internet, that is, the fact that with the increasing number of the internet users the travel services are provided by the internet more often as well as establishment of new combinations of travel services, new legal solutions became necessary which resulted in obligatory further protection of travelers

An Analysis on the Consumer Legal Protection in Umrah Package Travel Industry During Covid-19 Pandemic

Umrah package travel has been recognized as one of the main contributors to the Malaysian tourism industry. Muslims in Malaysia travel by package to Mecca and Medina for their specific purpose: to perform religious duty (Umrah) to fulfill the unity of spirit, heart and soul. Recently, thousands of Umrah packages were cancelled by the local tour operators and travel agents due to the decision made by the government of Saudi Arabia who banned the entry to Mecca and Medina due to the fast spread of Covid-19. Consequently, tour operators and travel agents respond differently to this extraordinary circumstance which leads to tremendous loss to the consumers. Thus, this paper aims to investigate how the Malaysian legal system safeguards the rights and interests of Umrah package travelers in Malaysia in the event of extraordinary circumstance by analyzing the existing academic literature and relevant statutes including Consumer Protection Act 1999, Tourism Industry Act 1992 and MATTA Code of Ethics for Members. The results of the above analysis will define the adequacy of the existing legal framework and the mechanism that we still need to protect the welfare of Umrah package travelers.