Source: http://recent-ecl.blogspot.com/2013/02/
Timestamp: 2019-05-19 16:51:39
Document Index: 611645372

Matched Legal Cases: ['CJEU ', 'CJEU ', 'CJEU ', 'CJEU ', 'Art. 2', 'Art. 7', 'CJEU ']

Recent developments in European Consumer Law: February 2013
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 20:11 No comments: Links to this post
Compensation for delayed connecting flights - CJEU Folkerts (C-11/11)
26 February 2013: CJEU judgment in the case Folkerts (C-11/11)
The past few judgments of the CJEU made it pretty clear that passengers of flights that get delayed by more than 3 hours may claim compensation from the airlines on the basis of Regulation No 261/2004 (Sturgeon and Others, Nelson and Others). New issues keep on arising though, with airlines trying to creatively protect themselves from having to pay out any money. The recent issue was what happens when a flight is delayed by less than 3 hours, however, a passenger misses his connection due to that delay (which of course left according to the schedule), and ultimately arrives at his final destination with a delay of more than 3 hours.
This has happened to Mrs Folkerts who was traveling from Bremen to Asunción - with connecting flights in Paris and São Paulo. The flight from Bremen was delayed by ca 2,5 hours, which meant Mrs Folkerts missed her connecting flight in Paris. As a result she arrived at her final destination only 11 hours after the originally scheduled arrival time.The airline (Air France) refused to pay her compensation for a delayed flight, claiming that the flight from Bremen to Paris was delayed for less than 3 hours and the following flights were not delayed at all.
The CJEU again underlined that a flight's delay causes passengers to suffer irreversible loss of time and inconvenience comparable to when a flight is cancelled (Par. 32). This inconvenience materialises only on arrival at the final destination, and, therefore, the delay should be calculated in relation to the scheduled arrival time at the destination. (Par. 33) The Regulation defines 'final destination' in Art. 2(h) as:
"destination on the ticket presented at the check-in counter or, in the case of directly connecting flights, the destination of the last flight"
This all means that when airlines have to calculate whether to pay out compensation of Art. 7 of the Regulation to the consumers they should only look at the delay beyond the scheduled time of arrival at the final destination - the destination of the last flight taken by the passenger. (Par. 35) The airlines will not be obliged to pay this compensation if the delay was caused by extraordinary circumstances. (Par. 43)
Labels: air travel, package travel, Regulation 261/2004
Posted by Chantal Mak at 12:49 No comments: Links to this post
Posted by Candida Leone at 12:35 No comments: Links to this post
Another draft law that the European Parliament voted on last week concerned sound level of motor vehicles. The standard for cars would be lowered from 74db to 68db in the next 6-8 years (with some margin of error for more powerful vehicles, incl 81db for lorries). Additionally, the new cars should be labelled on their noise performance so that consumers were informed what type of vehicle they are purchasing (just like currently they can see the fuel efficiency or CO2 emissions' labels on cars). An idea was also brought up in the discussions on this new law that e-cars should have a sound added to it - so that pedestrians are in no danger of being silently run over. (Parliament backs law to tone down harmful traffic noise)
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 16:46 No comments: Links to this post
Labels: environment, road travel, transportation
The European Parliament voted last week on a draft new law relating to the transparency of measures regulating the prices of medicinal products for human use and their inclusion in the scope of public health insurance system (see here for the resolution). The new law intends to introduce fair practices across the EU applying to purchasing 'generic' medicines (which should be available two years after the original branded medicine), making sure that their prices are transparently set (which should lower them) and that reimbursement through insurance systems would be easy and quick to claim. For example, a 60-day time limit to decide on the pricing and reimbursement is to be introduced. Such a time-limit would prohibit companies marketing the originally branded medicines to delay the introduction on the market of the generic medicines.
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 16:36 No comments: Links to this post
Today the Vice-President of the European Commission, Viviane Reding, is meeting with the chairmen of the European Telecommunications Network Operators' Association (ETNO), Luigi Gambardella, to discuss the forthcoming changes to the EU Data Protection rules. (Major Telecoms Operators Support Push for Level-Playing Field) This meeting is quite important, since in previous years whenever the European Commission proposed a new law concerning privacy or data protection issues, the lobbyists representing the telecommunication sector managed to heavily influence further works on these draft laws (e.g., by insisting on changing opt-in system with regards to acceptance of cookies to opt-out system). At the moment, it seems that the main concern of the telecommunication sector is making sure that the new rules would apply equally to companies from outside of and from the EU, as long as they operate on the EU market.
Posted by J.A. (Joasia) Luzak at 16:26 No comments: Links to this post
Institutional design, markets and consumers - CJEU judgment in Case C-68/12 Slovenská sporitel’ňa