Rechtsprechung

  • Rechtssachenbeschreibung
    • Nationale Kennung: X ZR 118/03
    • Mitgliedstaat: Deutschland
    • Gebräuchliche Bezeichnung:N/A
    • Art des Beschlusses: Sonstiges
    • Beschlussdatum: 11/01/2005
    • Gericht: BGH
    • Betreff:
    • Kläger:
    • Beklagter:
    • Schlagworte: Rechtsprechung Deutschland Deutsch
  • Artikel der Richtlinie
    Package Travel Directive, Article 4, 5. Package Travel Directive, Article 5, 2.
  • Leitsatz
    1. Wird eine Reise wegen Überbuchung durch den Reiseanbieter vereitelt, so ist der Reisekunde nicht verpflichtet, ein Alternativangebot anzunehmen. Vielmehr hat der Kunde neben der Erstattung des Reisepreises auch Anspruch auf eine Entschädigung des entgangenen Freizeitwertes der Reise.
    2. Der Reisende muss nicht darlegen und beweisen, dass er zur Zeit der vereitelten Reise tatsächlich zu Hause geblieben ist.
    3. Der Entschädigungsanspruch umfasst nur den zusätzlichen Freizeitwert der Reise im Vergleich zum häuslichen Urlaub.
  • Sachverhalt
    The claimants sought compensation due to uselessly spent holiday time. They booked and paid for a flight to and holiday in the Maldives with the respondent for the period 13th – 27th April 2002. One week prior to the agreed departure date, the respondent informed the claimants that the hotel they chose was overbooked and offered alternative accommodation on another island of the Maldives. The claimants did not accept this replacement offer but instead cancelled the holiday contract in writing on 10th April 2002. The respondents refunded the holiday price paid by the claimants. The claimants additionally seek compensation for uselessly spent holiday time in the amount of 75 Euros per day per person for 14 holiday days, totalling 2,100 Euros.

    The Amtsgericht (county court) rejected the claim. The claimants were successful on appeal to the Landgericht (district court). The respondents appealed for affirmation of the original judgment at first instance dismissing the claim. This appeal was unsuccessful. >
  • Rechtsfrage
  • Entscheidung

    The BGH stated that the claimants did not have to prove that they did in fact remain at home during the planned holiday time. With the frustration of the holiday, a fact grounding liability for the wasted holiday time was simultaneously determined. It is clear from the values underlying the legislation that compensation is necessary merely by virtue of the fact that the customer could not spend his holiday time in the way owed by the travel organiser. The aim and purpose of the legislation also support this view, as the customer could not put his holiday time to the concrete use as determined by the holiday booked by him with the travel organiser. In respect of employed/self-employed travel customers, extra work and a replacement holiday would not compromise the right to compensation either.
    In the view of the BGH, setting the level of compensation at around half the value of the holiday is legally sound. Due to the non-pecuniary character of this compensation right, a determination of the level of compensation for wasted holiday time according to the income of the customer would be forbidden against the background of the Package Travel Directive.
    Additionally, the BGH abandoned its previous case law, according to which the residual recreational value of a holiday at home mitigated damages, which the judge must take into account when determining the level of compensation. A holiday has recreational value with or without travel. The leisure value of a holiday spent at home has nothing to do with the travel contract; it is not what the customer wanted to buy with the travel price. Only the additional recreational value is to be compensated, which is promised to the customer by the holiday, i.e. the change of location. However, at the same time it is therefore possible that there may be no reduction from the measure of compensation if the customer would have retained this leisure value anyway, as is the case with a holiday spent at home.

    Volltext: Volltext

  • Verbundene Rechtssachen

    Keine Ergebnisse verfügbar

  • Rechtsliteratur

    Keine Ergebnisse verfügbar

  • Ergebnis