The case
A couple booked a package holiday through a local travel agency. Before the flight departure, the airline rescheduled the outbound flight to an earlier time.
The travel agency sought to notify the couple of the change by means of an e-mail message but the couple did not see the e-mail and consequently arrived at the airport too late for the rescheduled flight.
The couple was shocked and very frustrated at the travel agency at what they deemed a lack of communication about the change.
They subsequently requested a full refund from the travel agency, arguing that it should have taken additional steps to ensure that they were aware of the flight change.
The travel agency rejected the request, maintaining that it had fulfilled its obligation by promptly notifying the couple of the airline’s schedule change.
After attempts to reach an amicable settlement failed, the couple filed a complaint with the Office for Consumer Affairs at the MCCAA and sought resolution through its conciliation process.
However, as no agreement was reached, they eventually brought the matter before the Consumer Claims Tribunal (CCT), seeking compensation for their financial loss.
The tribunal’s considerations
The tribunal noted that the couple was claiming €1,998 from the travel agency, representing the cost of a package holiday to Albania that the couple could not make use of after missing their outbound flight.
The evidence showed that, at the time of booking, the couple had been provided with all relevant holiday and flight details.
Relying on the original itinerary, they arrived at the airport expecting to join their travel group, only to discover that the group was not there.
The tribunal noted that the travel agency had notified the couple of the earlier flight time by means of an e-mail message sent about 18 hours before departure.
But as the couple did not see the e-mail they remained unaware, and only learned about it when they called the travel agency from the airport when they were already too late to embark upon the flight.
The couple argued that the travel agency should have taken additional steps to ensure they were made aware of the flight schedule change rather than relying solely on an e-mail notification.
“The defendant could have easily contacted the claimant by telephone to confirm receipt of the e-mail notification”
The tribunal also noted that the couple had attempted to resolve the matter directly with the travel agency before starting formal proceedings. However, no agreement was reached, as the agency only offered a refund of €180, which the couple considered insufficient.
Furthermore, although the defendant company was duly notified of the proceedings, it neither filed a formal response nor attended the hearing to present its case.
As a result, the consumers’ account of events remained unchallenged.
The tribunal noted that the complainant’s claim was supported by documentary evidence that clearly established the facts and sequence of events. This evidence was further corroborated by the consumer’s sworn testimony.
The tribunal further considered that the claimant had suffered considerable inconvenience as a result of the defendant’s failure to ensure that its clients were properly informed of the revised departure time.
As a result, the claimant lost the opportunity to enjoy a holiday for which they had paid and to which they had been looking forward.
The tribunal also took into account that the travel group consisted of only eight couples. In such circumstances, the defendant could have easily contacted the claimant by telephone to confirm receipt of the e-mail notification.
The tribunal considered that such a follow-up would have been reasonable and proportionate given the importance of the information being communicated.
Moreover, the tribunal noted that the defendant made no attempt to contact the claimant after it became apparent that they were not present at the airport before departure. The tribunal considered this lack of follow-up to be a significant omission on the part of the defendant and one that could not be disregarded.
The tribunal’s decision
For the reasons outlined, and after considering the provisions of Chapter 378 of the Laws of Malta, the tribunal concluded that the claimant had proved their case and ordered the defendant company to refund the complainant the full sum paid for the package holiday.
The tribunal also awarded an additional €172, covering €152 in travel insurance costs and €20 for the medical certification required for travel.
Consequently, the travel agency was ordered to pay a total of €2,170, together with all costs of the proceedings.
Readers can access the full details of decisions issued by the Consumer Claims Tribunal, including information on the parties involved, by visiting: the website
Odette Vella is director Information, Education and Research, Office for Consumer Affairs, MCCAA.
