Current developments in European Client Regulation: Vouchers, a suitable reimbursement? – Cyber Information

On March 21, the CJEU revealed the latest judgment deciphering provisions of Regulation 261/2004 on air passenger rights within the case Cobult (C-76/23) regarding the potential of reimbursing passenger’s ticket value by a voucher.

A lot of our readers might have skilled a flight cancellation over the previous couple of years, not restricted to Covid-19-related causes. In case of a cancellation passengers might select to have their cancelled flight rescheduled (re-routing) or have their ticket prices reimbursed, pursuant to Article 8 of the Regulation 261/2004. Reimbursement may occur through varied means, together with through a voucher however the latter solely upon passenger’s “signed settlement”, pursuant to Article 7(3). Thus the reimbursement by a journey voucher “is introduced as a subsidiary technique of reimbursement” (para 20). 

On this case, TAP Air Portugal invited passengers to fill an internet type to say reimbursement of ticket prices, which might result in them being instantly compensated in journey vouchers. The web type included situations of acceptance, with textual content clarifying that acceptance of a journey voucher precluded additional reimbursement claims in different kinds. Another means of reimbursement was obtainable, if passengers contacted their customer support division and allowed them to look at case information (paras 8-9). 

The CJEU doesn’t exclude a chance that passengers may have offered a ‘signed settlement’ in an internet reimbursement type. A ‘signed’ settlement doesn’t want to incorporate the buyer’s signature on an internet type they’re submitting to the air service for reimbursement (para 34). Nonetheless, sure situations would should be met. First, passengers want to have the ability to give their free and knowledgeable consent to reimbursement through a journey voucher (para 22). This may require air carriers to supply passengers with “clear and full info on the varied technique of reimbursement” of ticket prices (para 30). This situation won’t be fulfilled if e.g., air service (para 32):

  • leaves any ambiguity on its web site, 
  • presents partial info, 
  • writes info in a language that passengers will not be proficient in (e.g. info on this case was given solely in English – would this be seen as compliant if many passengers have been Portuguese-speaking?), or 
  • if the process for claiming financial fee is unfair if in comparison with the process of claiming journey vouchers e.g. as a result of it incorporates further steps.

(…) the addition of such supplementary steps is liable to render reimbursement by a sum of cash tougher to acquire, and thus to upset the connection between the 2 technique of reimbursement” (para 33) – that is an fascinating conclusion by the CJEU, which follows current developments in different areas of EU client legislation. For instance, when assessing equity of cancellation technique of on-line subscriptions, we might additionally test whether or not there have been further steps included, which made the method extra complicated than when subscription was concluded.

Leave a Comment