Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62009CN0121

Case C-121/09: Action brought on 1 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

OJ C 141, 20.6.2009, p. 29–30 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

20.6.2009   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 141/29


Action brought on 1 April 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-121/09)

2009/C 141/51

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: W. Wils and C. Cattabriga, Agents)

Defendant: Italian Republic

Form of order sought

a declaration that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7 of Directive 90/314/EEC; (1)

an order that the Italian Republic should pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

1.

By fixing a period of three months from the foreseen date of the end of travel for the purpose of making an application for action by the Guarantee Fund for package travel consumers, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 7 of Directive 90/314.

2.

Article 7 of Directive 90/314 provides that the organiser and/or retailer party to the contract is to provide sufficient evidence of security for the refund of money paid over and for the repatriation of the consumer in the event of insolvency. According to the interpretation given in Community case-law, that provision imposes an obligation of result on the Member States, which entails affording the purchaser of package travel the right to effective protection against the risks of the organisers’ insolvency and, in particular, the refunding of sums paid over and repatriation.

3.

Next, Article 8 allows Member States to adopt more stringent provisions, but only if the latter offer greater consumer protection.

4.

In the instant case, the object of the Italian legislation in question, according to information sent by the national authorities during the infringement procedure, is to ensure that the State budget has the opportunity of recovering sums paid to consumers and so of preserving the State’s financial interests instead of ensuring greater protection for the purchasers of package travel.

5.

Although the Commission understands that Italy has an interest in ensuring the proper balanced running of the Guarantee Fund, making it easier for the latter to bring an action for indemnity against the tour operator, it takes the view that such a measure, by imposing an absolute limit on the presentation of the application for action by the Fund, introduces a condition capable of depriving the consumer of the rights guaranteed by Directive 90/314.

6.

It is true, as the Italian authorities maintain, that consumers may make their application for action by the Fund as soon as they are aware of circumstances that threaten to prevent the performance of the contract. However, in order to avail themselves of that opportunity they must be aware of those circumstances. Excluding those cases in which the travel organiser’s insolvency is obvious, by reason of a declaration of insolvency, in most cases consumers do not know the exact financial situation of the operator. It is therefore reasonable that they should in the first place turn to the operator to obtain repayment of sums paid, sending it a letter, perhaps a reminder, and finally an order to pay. In that manner there is a risk that the period of three months fixed by Article 5 of Ministerial Decree No 349/1999 may already have long elapsed when the application is made for action by the Fund, with the result that consumers are deprived of the right to obtain the refund of the sums paid.

7.

To remedy the infringement alleged in these proceedings, the Italian authorities declared, first, that they wished to extend from three to 12 months the period in which the application may be made and then that they intended to abolish it.

8.

In addition, they published in the Official Gazette of the Italian Republic a communication informing potentially interested persons that, pending abolition of the period in question, for the purposes of ensuring consumer protection applications may be made to the Guarantee Fund at any time.

9.

The Commission considers that such measures, while a laudable attempt to make good the consequences of the infringement complained of, do not do enough to eliminate the risk that purchasers of package travel may be deprived of their right to effective protection in the event of the organiser’s insolvency.

10.

For the purpose of fully ensuring legal certainty, so enabling individuals to know the full extent of their rights and to rely on them before the courts, the provisions of a directive must be given effect with unquestionable force, precision and clarity and not by means of mere administrative practices which, by their nature, are alterable at will by the national authorities.

11.

The coexistence, in the Italian legal order, of a provision, never formally repealed, prescribing a period of three months beyond which the introduction of an application for the Fund to take action will not be valid, on the one hand, and an administrative communication inviting the public to take no notice of that time-limit, on the other, clearly creates a situation of uncertainty for purchasers of package travel.


(1)  Council Directive 90/314/EEC of 13 June 1990 on package travel, package holidays and package tours (OJ 1990 L 158, p. 59).


Top