Source: https://e-justice.europa.eu/caseDetails.do?idTaxonomy=7529&amp;idCountry=19&amp;plang=en
Timestamp: 2019-10-16 03:16:52+00:00
Document Index: 1724504

Matched Legal Cases: ['qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'Qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'Qorti ', 'Qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ', 'qorti ']

Bugeja vs Bugeja M. Travel Limited
Court of Appeal (Inferior)
Andrew Bugeja et
Bugeja M. Travel Limited
accommodation, misleading actions, misleading statements, package travel
Package Travel Directive, link Package Travel Directive, Article 3, 1. Package Travel Directive, Article 4, 2. Package Travel Directive, Article 5, 1.
(1) The Regulations, which implement the provisions of Directive 90/314/EC into Maltese law, apply regardless of whether the contractual relationship is a service or a sale.
(2) Brochures are not equivalent to a contract under the Regulations (which implement the provisions of Directive 90/314/EC into Maltese law).
(3 The contract does not need to be signed by both parties.
(4) Organisers handing out brochures to consumers may sometimes be bound by such brochures.
On the 10th January 2013, the Small Claims Tribunal declared that the travel package that was sold to the plaintiffs by the defendant company was not of the promised quality.
The defendant company appealed to the Court of Appeal on the grounds that:
i) The contractual relationship between the parties was that of a service rather than a sale, and that therefore the plaintiffs’ action could not be upheld since they based their action on sale.
ii) The plaintiffs’ action could not be upheld because Article 1390 of the Civil Code (Chapter 16 of the Laws of Malta) merely offers the buyer to either reject the thing and demand damages, or to accept the thing with a diminution of the price, whilst the plaintiffs’ demanded a full refund after having gone on the trip .
iii) The Tribunal completely ignored the contract that was entered into between the parties.
1) Basing itself on Regulation 15.1 of the The Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations (which implements Article 5 of Directive 90/314/EC into Maltese law) the court emphasised that the Regulations apply regardless of whether the contractual relationship between the parties is based on a sale or a service.
2) Where a brochure is given to the consumer this is not considered a contract.
3) Moreover, it is not required that a contract is signed by both parties. Rather, the organiser who offers the travel package is obliged to ensure that the consumer is given a written copy of the conditions of the contract as per Regulation 9.1 (which implements Article 4(2) of Directive 90/314/EC into Maltese law), failing which he shall be guilty of an offence against the Regulations (Regulation 9.3).
4) The court reasoned that since the plaintiffs were given the brochure of a particular hotel, they were reasonably entitled to expect to be lodged at that particular hotel or at least one of a similar quality. Instead they were taken to another hotel which was of an inferior quality and which lacked certain facilities. The court also emphasised that it is the organiser’s obligation to ensure that his client is comfortable in the hotel that is offered to him.
(1) Do the Regulations, which implement the provisions of Directive 90/314/EC into Maltese law, apply regardless of whether the contractual relationship is a service or a sale?
(2) Is a brochure equivalent to a contract under the Regulations (which implement the provisions of Directive 90/314/EC into Maltese law)?
(3) Does the contract need to be signed by both parties?
(4) Are organisers bound by the brochures that are given to consumers?
The court dismissed the appeal of the defendant company and confirmed the Tribunal's decision which ordered the defendant company to pay €3,200 to the plaintiffs.
Permezz ta’ avviz prezentat fid-29 ta’ Settembru 2010, l-atturi talbu li l- konvenuta tigi kkundannata thallas is-somma ta’ €3,200, peress li l-pakkett ta’ vaganza li xtraw minghand il-konvenuta fil-weekend 22-25 ta’ Lulju 2010 ma kienx skond il-kwalita pattwita, b’mod partikolari ghal dak li kellu x’jaqsam ma’ akkomodazzjoni fil-lukanda u telf ta’ excursions.
Permezz ta’ twegiba l-konvenuta wiegbet li n-negozju guridiku ma kienx bejgh, u t-talba tal-atturi hi nfondata fil-fatt u fid-dritt.
B’sentenza tal-10 ta’ Jannar 2013, it-Tribunal ghal Talbiet Zghar iddikjara li x- xiri ta’ pakkett tal-ivjaggar huwa ghal servizz u mhux bejgh. Ghalkemm fl- avviz kien jissemma bejgh, madankollu l-ezitu kien xorta ghaliex id-danni huma rimbors tal-ispejjez lill-atturi. Zied li mill-provi kienu irrizultaw nuqqasijiet da parti tas-socjeta konvenuta ghal dak li jikkoncerna l-lukanda u excursions, u kkundannat lis-socjeta konvenuta sabiex thallas lill-atturi s- somma ta’ elfejn u hames mitt ewro (€2,500) bl-imghax mid-data tal-avviz.
Is-socjeta konvenuta appellat mis-sentenza. L-aggravji huma:-
1. It-Tribunal kien korrett li n-negozju guridiku ma kienx bejgh izda appalt. Pero’ kien zbaljat meta cahad l-ewwel eccezzjoni tal-konvenuta.
2. L-azzjoni hi mproponibbli. L-Artikolu 1390 tal-Kodici Civili joffri zewg alternattivi biss fejn l-atturi setghu jaghzlu jew li jirrifjutaw il-haga u jitolbu d-danni jew li jircievu l-haga bi prezz anqas.
3. It-Tribunal skarta ghal kollox il-kuntratt bejn il-partijiet.
4. It-Tribunal zbalja meta ta lill-atturi l-imghax mid-data tal-avviz fuq l- ammont likwidat, u dan in vista tal-principju in illiquidis non fit mora.
Il-qorti rat l-atti u tosserva:-
1. L-atturi xtraw minghand is-socjeta konvenuta pakkett ta’ ivvjaggar bejn
22 u 25 ta’ Lulju, 2010 gewwa Sqallija. Il-prezz kien jinkludi:-
i. Vjagg lejn Pozzallo bil-catamaran Maria Dolores tal-Virtu Ferries;
ii. Lukanda 3/4 star fic-centru ta’ Giardini Naxos, vicin il-bahar;
iii. Buffet breakfast u 3 course meal kull filghaxija;
iv. Excursions kollha mhallsin fejn izuru: Siracusa, Fiume Ciane, l’Acqua Park Etnaland, is-Suq ta’ Catania, Etanpolis, Taromina by Night, Acireale, Acitrezza, Acicastello, Katane Coop u Auchan Hypermarket bis-servizz ta’ tourleader.
v. Taxxi u fuel surcharge kollha nkluzi fil-prezz.
2. Ma jirrizultax li gie ffirmat kuntratt. Pakketti ta’ vvjaggar huma regolati minn Regolamenti dwar Pakkett ta’ l-Ivvjaggar, Pakkett Vaganzi u Pakkett ta’ Tours (Ligi Sussidjarja 409.01). Ir-regolamenti jirreferu ghall-bejgh ta’ pakkett ta’ ivvjaggar.
3. L-appellanti ssostni li ladarba t-Tribunal ikkonkluda li n-negozju guridiku bejn il-partijiet kien appalt, ma kellux jichad l-ewwel eccezzjoni. Il-qorti ma taqbilx. Ma kien hemm xejn milli jzomm lit- Tribunal li jiddeciedi favur l-atturi gialadarba kien sodisfatt li mill-provi rrizulta li s-socjeta konvenuta naqset milli twettaq l-obbligi taghha. F’dan il-kuntest hu rilevanti l-Artikolu 213 tal-Kap. 12 u wkoll sentenza ta’ din il-qorti 1 fil-kawza GasanMamo Insurance Agency Ltd vs Joseph Zammit tal-10 ta’ Ottubru 2005 fejn intqal:
“huwa manifest mid-dispost ta’ l-Artikolu 9 ta’ l-Att V ta’ l-1995 illi t- Tribunal mhux marbut bl-osservanza tal-formalita` u allura lanqas ma hu marbut bil-kawzali ta’ l-avviz. Dan wara kollox hu hekk anke fil-kaz tal-Qorti ta’ gurisdizzjoni civili ta’ sedi inferjuri. Ara Artikolu 213, Kapitolu 12”.
4. Fit-tieni aggravju l-appellanti argumentat li l-azzjoni attrici hi improponibbli u ghamlet riferenza ghall-Artikolu 1390 tal-Kodici Civili. F’paragrafu 14 tar-rikors tal-appell l-appellanti qalet:-
“…. ladarba t-Tribunal fis-sentenza appellata ma laqax l-ewwel eccezzjoni tas-socjeta esponenti, l-azzjoni mertu ta’ din il-kawza baqghet dik imsejsa fuq l-Artikolu 1390 tal-Kodici Civili fil-ligi tal- bejgh”.
Dan mhux korrett. Fis-sentenza t-Tribunal ghamilha cara li fil-fehma tieghu l-kuntratt kien appalt. Madankollu t-Tribunal irraguna li l-ezitu xorta kien ser ikun l-istess, irrispettivament jekk in-negozju guridiku kienx bejgh jew appalt, ghaliex fiz-zewg kazijiet id-danni kienu ser ikunu rimbors tal-ispejjez tal-atturi.
5. Ir-relazzjoni guridika ta’ bejn il-partijiet hi regolata mil-Ligi Sussidjarja 409.01, irrispettivament jekk in-negozju guridiku hu bejgh jew appalt. Skond regolament 15.1:-
“L-organizzatur u, jew in-negozjant li jkun parti fil-kuntratt, ikun responsabbli lejn il-konsumatur ghat-twettiq sew ta’ kull obbligu taht il-kuntratt, irrispettivament minn jekk dawk l- obbligi ghandhomx jitwettqu mill-organizzatur, min- negozjant, jew mill-provdituri l-ohra tas-servizzi. Dan ma ghandu jolqot ebda dritt ta’ azzjoni li l-organizzatur u, jew in-negozjant jista’ jkollu kontra n-negozjant jew dawk il-provdituri l-ohra ta’ servizzi”.
6. F’dan it-tip ta’ negozju l-pubblikazzoni ta’ brochure m’huwiex essenzjali (regolament 5.1). Madankollu fejn jinghata brochure lill-konsumatur, m’huwiex il-kuntratt. Ghalhekk ta’ xejn il-konvenuta tinvoka l- brochure biex tipprova tfarfar ir-responsabbilta. L-elementi essenzjali ghall-kuntratt m’humiex kollha l-istess bhall-elementi mehtiega ghall- brochure (ara regolamenti 5.1 u 8.1).
Il-qorti tifhem ir-regolamenti fis-sens li ftehim ghax-xiri ta’ pakkett ta’ l- ivvjaggar m’hemmx ghalfejn li l-kuntratt ikun iffirmat miz-zewg partijiet. Madankollu r-regolamenti jezigu li l-organizzatur ghandu d- dmir jassigura li jinghata lill-konsumatur kopja bil-miktub tal-pattijiet u kondizzjonijiet tal-kuntratt (regolament 9.1), u fin-nuqqas ikun hati ta’ reat (regolament 9.3).
7. Mill-provi l-qorti tosserva li:-
i.	Ma tara xejn x’ticcensura fil-konkluzjoni tat-Tribunal li l-ftehim kien li l-atturi kellhom ikunu alloggati fil-lukanda Arcipelago. Hu veru li fil-brochure tas-socjeta konvenuta ma tissemmiex il- lukanda fejn l-atturi kellhom jigu alloggati, pero’ ‘l fatt li nghataw brochure tal-lukanda Arcipelago hu fih innifsu ndizju li l-ftehim kien li ser joqghodu fiha. F’dan il-kuntest ukoll Emanuel Cutajar xehed li l-attur Andrew Bugeja kien tah il-flus biex imur ihallas lis-socjeta konvenuta u tah ukoll brochure tal-lukanda Arcipelago u qallu “…. Li ried illi ma’ dan il-booking huma jigu bbukkjati f’dan il-Hotel Arcipelago, f’Giardini Naxos, Sqallija u jiena ftehemt maghha illi huma kellhom joqghodu f’din il- lukanda” (fol. 42). Hu veru wkoll li m’hemm xejn bil-miktub, pero’ l-konvenuta ma tistax tiehu beneficcju min-nuqqas taghha stess . Ghalkemm Marthese Bugeja, direttur tas-socjeta konvenuta, qalet li xahar qabel il-vjagg infurmat lil Andrew Bugeja li kienu ser ikunu alloggati fil-lukanda del Sole u ta l- kunsens tieghu, il-qorti ma temminx. F’dan ir-rigward m’hemmx prova li l-attur inghata brochure tal-lukanda del Sole. Kieku l- verzjoni ta’ Marthese Bugeja tirrifletti l-verita, fuq bazi ta’ probabilita Andrew Bugeja kien jitlob li jinghata brochure ta’ dik il-lukanda sabiex jiddiskuti ma’ shabu l-ohra qabel tittiehed decizjoni. In kontro-ezami Marthese Bugeja qalet li: “…. Hija kienet uriet il-brochure ta’ l-Albergo del Sole lill-klijent” (fol. 75). Fatt li fl-affidavit ma semmietx. Fl-affidavit Marthese Bugeja qalet li xahar qabel il-vjagg kienet cemplet lill-attur u qaltlu li ser ikunu alloggati fil-lukanda del Sole u “Andrew Bugeja qalli orrajt. Dan kien l-uniku diskors li kien hemm bejnietna”. Verzjonijiet differenti li tat l-istess xhud.
Hu minnu li l-attrici Stephanie Spiteri xehedet li meta lmentaw dwar id-daqs tal-kmamar fil-lukanda del Sole, it-tour leader ipproponiet li jmorru fil-lukanda Arcipelago (fol. 15). Pero’ l-qorti ma tifhimx kif jekk din il-proposta verament saret mit-tour leader, min-naha taghha Marthese Bugeja qatt ma semmietha fl-affidavit u meta xehedet viva voce fis-seduta tal-5 ta’ Lulju 2011.
ii.	Meta waslu fi Sqallija l-atturi spiccaw alloggati fil-lukanda del Sole, fejn hu evidenti li kien hemm nuqqas ta’ kumdita’ partikolarment ghal dawk il-kmamar ghal tliet persuni. Irrispettivament jekk kienx jezisti ftehim jew le li l-atturi jkunu alloggati fil-lukanda Arcipelago, jibqa’ ‘l fatt li mill-provi rrizulta li l-lukanda fejn ittiehdu (del Sole) kellha nuqqasijiet. L-appellanti argumentat li l-ilmenti dwar id-daqs tal-kmamar, air conditioner, lift, daqs ta’ showers “…. huwa irrizorju u guridikament irrilevanti. L-atturi ma jistghu qatt jallegaw li ftehemu fuq kwalita’ ahjar peress li ma kien hemm ebda patt dwar dan”. Ragunament ta’ din ix-xorta ma jirrifletti xejn tajjeb fuq il- konvenuta. Dawn huma affarijiet essenzjali. Hu d-dmir tal- organizzatur li jizgura li l-klijent ser ikun qieghed komdu fil- lukanda li joffrilu. Hu ragonevoli per ezempju li l-konsumatur jistenna li l-kmamar f’lukanda 3 star gewwa Sqallija, fejn is-sajf hu qalil daqs Malta, jkunu b’airconditioner. Jirrizulta li wara li l- atturi lmentaw intbaghatu f’lukanda ohra, Sporting Baia, izda ma nghatawx kmamar u marru lura fil-lukanda Del Sole u eventwalment regghu spiccaw fil-lukanda Sporting Baia, pero’f’bini differenti. Sa dak il-hin kien lehaq sar tard filghaxijia. Irrizulta iktar tard li f’din il-lukanda l-atturi kienu gew ibbukkjati ghal jumejn biss. Fil-fatt fit-tielet gurnata meta rritornaw il- lukanda wara gurnata Etna Land, sabu l-bagalji taghhom fir- reception area u l-oggetti li kellhom depozitati fis-safe tal- lukanda kienu tnehhew ukoll. Minn hemm spiccaw f’lukanda ohra, Eliseo Hotel, li ma kinitx hdejn il-bahar u lanqas kellha s- servizz tal-lift. L-attrici Stephanie Spiteri xehedet li l-lukanda kienet “…. Hdejn railway u ma stajniex norqdu bl-istorbju li kien hemm, u jiena ma stajtx norqod” (fol. 16). Il-qorti ma temminx lil Marthese Bugeja meta qalet li lill-atturi kienet avzathom minn qabel li kien ser ikollhom jittrasferixxu f’lukanda ohra. Fuq bazi ta’ probabilta kieku Marthese Bugeja kienet qaltilhom, l-atturi kienu jippakkjaw il-bagalji minn qabel u filghodu jnizzluhom fir- reception area u jiddepozitawhom mar-reception desk. Pero’ Stephanie Spiteri xehedet: “Jien x’hin ftaht il-bagalja tieghi sibt hwejjeg li ma kienux jappartjenu lili” (fol. 16). Kliem li lill-qorti jatiha x’tifhem li kollox sehh minghajr pre-avviz. Hu veru li l- ahhar faccata tal-brochure fiha numru ta’ kundizzjonijiet. Hekk per ezempju paragrafu 5 jipprovdi li l-organizzatur izomm id- dritt li jibdel il-lukanda, izda “dejjem ghall-gid tal- passiggier”. Dak li gara f’dan il-kaz ma kienx ghall-gid tal- konsumatur. Ghall-qorti hu evidenti li l-problema nqalghet minhabba nuqqas ta’ preparament min-naha tal-konvenuta biex tizgura li l-atturi jkunu alloggati f’lukanda komda u vicin il-bahar.
iii.	Mill-verzjoni ta’ Stephanie Spiteri u n-notamenti li hadet hu evidenti li nqalghu problemi ohra f’dan il-vjagg, u li minnhom il- qorti tkompli ssahhah il-fehma li dan kien kaz ta’ twettiq mhux xieraq tas-servizzi nvoluti fil-pakkett u li ghalih hi responsabbli s- socjeta konvenuta bhala l-organizzatur. Filwaqt li fil-brochure jinghad li fir-raba’ gurnata kellu jsir il-vjagg lura lejn Malta “b’hafna memorji sbieh”, dan zgur li ma setax kien il-kaz ghall-atturi meta tqies id-diversi problemi li nqalghu.
8. Fir-rigward tad-danni l-konvenuta lmentat li t-Tribunal ma spjegax kif wasal biex jillikwida s-somma ta’ €2,500 bhala danni. Issostni li l-atturi kellhom fil-fatt jaghtu prova tat-telf attwali li garrbu, u minn dan ma ppruvaw xejn. Il-qorti tosserva:-
i. Mill-provi rrizulta li l-atturi hallsu komplessivament is-somma ta’ €3,210.
ii.	Mis-sentenza hu evidenti li s-somma ta’ €2,500 giet likwidata mit-Tribunal fuq bazi ta’ arbitrio boni viri.
iii.	Fir-realta’ d-danni jikkonsistu fil-fatt li l-atturi hallsu prezz biex xtraw pakkett ta’ l-ivvjaggar, li fl-ezekuzzjoni tieghu kellu nuqqasijiet serji. Mill-provi li tressqu d-danni jistghu biss jigu likwidati arbitrio boni viri, wara li jigu kkunsidrati x’kienu n- nuqqasijiet. Fic-cirkostanzi t-Tribunal kellu kull dritt li juza d- diskrezzjoni tieghu fil-likwidazzjoni tas-somma li l-konvenuta giet kundannata thallas.
iv. Wara li qieset il-provi ma tara xejn x’ticcensura fl-ammont li llikwida t-Tribunal meta tqies in-nuqqasijiet tas-socjeta konvenuta fit-twettiq tal-obbligi taghha.
Il-qorti tinnota wkoll li l-Ligi Sussidjara hi bazata fuq id-Direttiva Ewoprea 90/314/EEC tat-13 ta’ Gunju 1990, Package travel, package holidays and package tours. F’sentenza tat-12 ta’ Marzu 2002 fil-kaz, C-168/00, il-Qorti tal-Gustizzja Ewropea osservat:-
“The answer to be given to the question referred must therefore be that Article 5 of the Directive is to be interpreted as conferring, in principle, on consumers a right to compensation for non- material damage resulting from the non performance or improper performance of the services constituting a package holiday”.
F’dak il-kaz kienet saret preliminary reference ghaliex is-sistema legali Awstrijaka ma kinitx tipprovdi ghal danni li m’humiex materjali.
Ghalkemm fil-ligi lokali ma jidhirx li hemm provvediment li jipprovdi ghal dak li jissejhu non-material damage, fil-kaz C-355/96 Silhouette International Schmied (1998), il-Qorti Ewropea qalet:-
“…. According to the same case-law, when applying domestic law, whether adopted before or after the directive, the national court that has to interpret the law must do so, as far as possible, in the light of the wording and the purpose of the directive so as to achieve the result it has in view……” (§36)12.
Ukoll meta tqies dan il-fattur il-qorti hi tal-fehma li fic-cirkostanzi attwali da’ dan il-kaz, l-ammont likwidat bhala danni m’huwiex eccessiv.
9. Fir-rigward tal-imghax, il-qorti m’hijiex tal-fehma li ghandha tvarja dak li ddecieda t-Tribunal in vista tal-fatt li s-socjeta konvenuta rceviet flus l-atturi sa minn qabel il-vjagg u in kontrokambju tathom servizz fqir u mhux mistenni minn min fil-brochure tal-vjaggi jiftahar li ghandu ‘l fuq minn	ghoxrin sena ta’ esperjenza jorganizza l-giti fi Sqallija u jispecjalizza f’dik ir-rotta. Dan apparti li l-atturi kienu qeghdin jitolbu s- somma ta’ €3,200, cjoe’ rifuzjoni kwazi tal-prezz kollu li hallsu. Ghalhekk m’huwiex minnu li l-konvenut kellu ideja ta’ dak li qeghdin jippretendu l-atturi mid-data tas-sentenza. Il-kaz ma jistax jigi paragunat ma’ kazijiet fejn l-attur jillimita ruhu biex jitlob lill-qorti tillikwida l-ammont ta’ flus li ghandu jhallas il-konvenut minghajr ma jaghti hjiel ta’ x’qieghed jippretendi.
Ghal dawn il-motivi tichad l-appell bl-ispejjez kontra l-appellanti.