Legal Quiz

Storyline One:

Timothy Simons and James Roberts, two middle-aged solicitors, have been working so hard that their respective wives decide to go on holiday together without them.

Feeling guilty and wishing to make it up to their wives, the two men offer to pay for the holiday, a half-board package in Antigua. They also promise to deal with the paperwork and other arrangements.

The holiday is booked in James’ name and paid for by both him and Timothy. But on arrival, the women are given a room with a double bed.

James had not specified a twin when he booked, and had also not bothered checking the invoice, which stated a double room had been allocated.

There is no twin room available throughout the stay and both women suffer embarrassment and loss of sleep. James’ wife is also irritated because the hotel restaurant refuses to cook her egg and chips for breakfast and fish and chips for dinner.

When the wives return, they are angry and want to make a claim against the operator. However, they say their husbands should be the ones who make the claim, as it was they who booked and paid for the holiday. James and Timothy tell them that, as they did not, themselves, go on the holiday, they are not entitled to make a claim, and it is their wives who will have to do this.

Can the wives claim against the tour operator for the failure to provide a twin room?

Can James’ wife claim against the tour operator for the hotel’s refusal to provide eggs and chips?

Are James and Timothy correct in saying they themselves cannot make a claim?

Question one: No. Because a twin was not requested at the time of booking, and James did not check the booking documentation and bring this to the attention of the tour operator.

Question two: No. In the absence of any specific promise that such a dish would be available, there is no obligation on the hotel to provide it.

Question three: No. As lead name on the booking, James can make a claim on the women’s behalf, despite the that he did not actually go on the holiday.

Superlux Travel offer a weekend break in New York, including flights on Concorde, five-star hotel accommodation, and a helicopter flight around the city.

Because the break is so expensive, it often has to be cancelled because not enough people book to make it economically viable. The brochure states that cancellations may occur for this reason, but that this will not happen less than six weeks before the departure date.

Mr and Mrs V. Rich book places on the weekend six months’ in advance, receive confirmation of this and make payment, in-full, at that time.

However, seven weeks before the departure date, they are informed that the break has been cancelled because minimum numbers have not been met.

They are offered an alternative (and considerably less expensive) break, to Boston, which they accept, but Superlux refuses to refund the difference in price, saying that it was not their fault the original had to be cancelled.

While in Boston, in an attempt to imitate what they would have experienced in New York, the Riches book a helicopter flight around the city with a local company.

On the day of the flight, however, the helicopter breaks down. The flight is cancelled, and the company refuses to refund Mr and Mrs Rich.

Are Superlux liable to compensate the Richs for cancellation of the original New York break?

Are Superlux liable to refund to the Richs the difference in price between the New York and Boston breaks?

Do Superlux have any liability to refund the Richs the price of the cancelled helicopter flight in Boston?

Question one: No. The Package Travel Regulations state that holidays can be cancelled because minimum numbers are not met, so long as this and the relevant deadline for informing clients is stated in the brochure The Richs would be entitled to a refund or an alternative holiday, but no additional compensation.

Question two: Yes. Where a tour operator cancels a package and offers the client an alternative, if the alternative is less expensive, the tour operator must refund the difference to the client.

Question three: No. The flight was organised independently. It was therefore not part of the package booked with Superlux, and they have no liability for anything that goes wrong.