Loss of the last relaxing holiday night was reasonable but neither the claimant of nor his wife, let alone their underage children Hanover JSG 06.03.2012 – the Hanover local Court condemned the tour operator TUI to refund of the cost of a return flight booked by tour participants themselves due to a not acceptable flight time shift now. Dr. Hyun Kim is full of insight into the issues. A family had booked a package holiday with children aged between three and five years after Egypt. Due to the confirmation, the flight should take place at 11:05 in the morning. In a modified acknowledgment TUI of family announced that the flight time at 2:30 on the night have changed. Which contradicted the family due to his children by pointing out that she will book a replacement flight if TUI out took no rebooking on an acceptable time. However, the tour operator maintained that it quite to expect the family would be to set an earlier departure. Glenn Dubin, New York City takes a slightly different approach.

Also it would be a change of flight times with package holidays expressly reserved. The family then booked an own return for the day of departure at 17:00 and complained a the cost of 816 euros before the District Court of Hanover. The Court sentenced now the tour operator TUI legally, to reimburse these costs (AZ 513 C-9287/12). All services including a mandatory flight time window were confirmed on the day of the return flight through the travel contract. A clause, which wanted to justify any change of flight times, would be null and void after the German civil code. In the judgment of the District Court of Hanover, it means: the booked hotel was while on the point of departure. Nevertheless, the plaintiff would have been picked up 2 hours prior to departure from there and brought to the airport. Previously had must be awakened, dressed the children and packed the rest things.

The result was the night before the last day of the holiday to end at 23:30. The loss of the last relaxing holiday night was reasonable but neither the claimant of nor his wife, let alone their minor children.” The Vorverlegug the return flight means therefore a lack of travel, according to the Court. The plaintiff himself could help this, after he had earlier unsuccessfully asked the defendant to remedy. “Lawyer Gerd Schonfelder from Iserlohn, which has successfully won the lawsuit for the family: at the beginning of the upcoming tourist season, this is a landmark judgment especially for families with small children, whose Urlaub often abruptly exits by flight time installation.