Tour operator cannot be blamed for hurricane

A court yesterday revoked a ruling of the Consumer Claims Tribunal on the basis that it was not logical.

The judgment was delivered by Mr Justice Philip Sciberras, sitting in the Court of Appeal, in a case instituted by Dorianne and Alex Mangion against Mondial Holidays.

Mr and Mrs Mangion had asked the tribunal to award them damages in the sum of Lm1,200 (€2,795) together with moral damages because they had gone on holiday to the Caribbean and Miami, through the services of Mondial Holidays, and were the victims of a hurricane.

The tribunal had found in favour of Mr and Mrs Mangion adding that they were not to blame for what had occurred. The tribunal added that Mondial Holidays was unaware of the hurricane but it found the version of events given by Mr and Mrs Mangion to be more credible. The Mangions were awarded Lm600 (€1,397) in damages.

Mondial Holidays resorted to the Court of Appeal in its inferior jurisdiction claiming that the rules of natural justice had not been observed by the tribunal, which had used contradictory reasoning when delivering its ruling.

Mr Justice Sciberras ruled that according to law the tribunal was empowered to hear and decide in accordance with substantive justice and equity. It was therefore clear that the tribunal was not bound to strictly observe the laws of procedure and laws governing the merits of the case. On the other hand, the tribunal's rulings were always subject to criticism if they violated the principles of natural justice.

The courts could therefore review the rulings of the tribunal if it was proven that the ruling was not based on logical motivation. The parties to a suit had to be given a fair hearing and had also to be informed of the reasons behind a ruling.

Mr Justice Sciberras said that such ruling had not been truly logical and was contradictory and non-consequential. It was a fact that Mondial Holidays was not aware that Hurricane Frances would occur when the Mangions reached their destination. In any event, how could a tour operator be blamed for such an irresistible force of nature that partially ruined Mr and Mrs Mangion's holiday?

The ruling had not given any intelligent or plausible explanation for its conclusions against Mondial Holidays.

It appeared to be the case that in different jurisdictions there existed the principle that a tourist was entitled to an action for damages when his holiday was ruined. It was also accepted that such damages were of a moral nature.

However, it had always to be proven that the damages were the result of fault on the part of the tour operator. This had not been proven to be the case in this law suit.

The court, therefore. upheld the appeal and revoked the tribunal's ruling.