In a decision of June 6, 2013, the Paris Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the French Competition Authority fining the Géfil trade association and ten consulting firms in the leisure, culture and tourism engineering sector a total amount of EUR 660.700 for having issued instructions to use “fair prices” and to avoid “dumping” and “price wars”. These instructions were found to have been used as a benchmark for price quotations filed by consulting firms in response to calls for tenders.
The plaintiff had a history of some gynaecological issues and she had been prone to recurrent symptoms suggestive of urinary infection, ie. cystitis. She had treated herself and had bought "over the counter" medication to take if she had an episode of it.She had packed this medication in her main luggage before going on her flight from London Heathrow to Melbourne via Kuala Lumpur with the defandant carrier. Before the plainitff boarded the aircraft she urinated normally at about 9pm.
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) fined Virgin America USD 150,000 for failing to make its in-flight safety video accessible to passengers with hearing impairments. The airline also was ordered to cease and desist from further violations.
The appellant was a patron at the respondent Hotel on the night of 4 July 2008. The manager on duty that night formed the view the appellant was intoxicated, and after speaking with the Hotel's licensee, instructed a security guard to remove her from the premises. He did so by pulling the stool on which the appellant was seated out from underneath her. The appellant fell to the floor and was injured. The security guard was employed by a company called "Checkmate".
The European Commission brought a series of infringement proceedings against eight Member States for failure to comply with their obligations under the directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax. The actions relate to the special scheme for travel agents.
The Regulation (EC) No 1371/2007 on rail passengers’ rights and obligations provides that the liability of railway undertakings in the case of delay is governed by the Uniform Rules concerning the Contract for International Carriage of Passengers and Luggage by Rail, subject to the applicable provisions of the regulation.
In judgements issued yesterday in two parallel cases, the German Supreme Court (BGH) has held that a bird strike constitutes extraordinary circumstances and thus exempts the air carrier from the obligation to pay compensation to the passengers in case of a cancellation or a long delay if the air carrier can prove that it had taken all reasonable measures to avoid the cacellation or delay. The Supreme Court argued that bird strikes were unforeseeable and unforstallable events for air carriers.
In a recent judgment, the German Supreme Court (BGH) reconfirmed that passengers who miss their connecting flight due to a delay of the feeder are entitled to claim for compensation if they reach their final destination 3 hrs or more after their scheduled arrival. The plaintiffs had booked a flight from Miami to Düsseldorf via Madrid. As the departure in Miami was delayed for 01:20 hrs they arrived in Madrid too late to catch their connecting flight to Düsseldorf. They were rebooked to another flight and reached Düsseldorf with a delay of 07:30 hrs.
In two separate decisions of Aug. 29, 2013, the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA) ordered Air Canada and Porter Airlines to revise certain domestic tariff provisions. A tariff is the contract between the carrier and the passenger which contains an air carrier’s terms and conditions of carriage. Tariff provisions are enforceable by the CTA.