Austria: Supreme Court decision on loss of holiday enjoyment

A couple booked a package holiday arrangement for their honeymoon in Egypt at EUR 1.448. Back home they complained about improper performance and assigned their claims to a consumer protection association (Verein für Konsumenteninformation – VKI) which sued for a price reduction of EUR 1.320,90 and compensation for loss of holiday enjoyment of EUR 560 (deducting a refund of EUR 141 by the tour operator).First instance court (Bezirksgericht für Handelssachen Wien) granted additional EUR 150,60 comprising of a price reduction of 5 % for a defect air condition, 5 % for construction noise and another 10 % for an insufficient beach space (contrary to promises in the brochure) but dismissed the claim for compensation for loss of holiday enjoyment.Appelate court (Commercial Court Vienna – Handelsgericht Wien) doubled the price reduction by granting additional 5 % for bad water quality of the pool, 5 % for ponding the room when flowers were watered and another 10 % for noise during the night. However, appelate court upheld dismissal of the claim for compensation for loss of holiday enjoyment: the shortcomings had not exceeded the threshold of relevance.Upon further appeal by the plaintiff, Supreme Court in judgement 2 Ob 45/10x of June 17, 2010 emphasized the different legal nature and purpose of price reduction on the one hand and compensation for loss of holiday enjoyment on the other. Following a previous decision, Supreme Court decided in favour of a rather low threshold of relevance and granted the claim for compensation for loss of holiday enjoyment. However, Supreme Court disagreed with the view that the threshold of relevance with regard to loss of holiday enjoyment should be equated with any shortcoming more than negligible under warranty law.The total grant thus amounted to EUR 1.002,20. Supreme Court noted that the price reduction granted by the appelate court (which was not subject of his decison) was “very generous” in favour of the claimants.Note:1) Even given this generous grant, the consumer protection association only succeeded with roughly 58 % of the claim – which proves a tendency of the assocoation to sue for excessive amounts.2) The fact that it was a honeymoon trip was not decisive.Full text of judgement 2 Ob 45/10x of June 17, 2010 available in German here>>.

Leave a Comment