VISA AND INFORMATION OBLIGATION OF THE TRAVEL AGENCY
LexInter | August 6, 2010 | 0 Comments

VISA AND INFORMATION OBLIGATION OF THE TRAVEL AGENCY

FRENCH REPUBLIC
IN THE NAME OF THE FRENCH PEOPLE

IN THE NAME OF THE FRENCH PEOPLE

THE COURT OF CASSATION, FIRST CIVIL CHAMBER, delivered the following judgment:

Whereas Mr M., who had bought, through the agency Atlas Voyages, a ticket for a return flight Lyon-Abidjan on a Lufthansa airline, was refused entry to the territory of Côte d’Ivoire, for lack of a visa; that he sued the travel agency for compensation for his prejudices, which called in guarantee the company Lufthansa; that this one was condemned, that one having been put out of cause;

On the first plea, taken in its three branches, of the main appeal of the company Lufthansa, as it appears in the statement of claim and is appended to this judgment:

Whereas, first of all, article L. 322-2 of the Civil Aviation Code, which provides that the air carrier can only embark travelers after proof that they are regularly authorized to land at the point of arrival and at the planned stopovers, contains the obligation, at the expense of this carrier, to check that the passengers, parties to the contract of carriage, are provided with the documents necessary for their entry into the territory of the country of destination; that then, the obligation, for the passenger, to comply with the governmental requirements concerning the documents of entry and exit of the territories to which he is going, could not exonerate the air carrier from its obligation of verifications of the completion of the formalities required for the complete effectiveness of the transport contract; that finally, it does not appear from the writings of the company Lufthansa that it has, in response to claims of Mr X … directed against him, invoked the legal consequences likely to result from the fault possibly committed by him; that the means, ill-founded in its first branch, inoperative in its second, and inadmissible, as new and mixed in fact, in its third, can not be accepted; invoked the legal consequences likely to result from any fault committed by him; that the means, ill-founded in its first branch, inoperative in its second, and inadmissible, as new and mixed in fact, in its third, can not be accepted; invoked the legal consequences likely to result from any fault committed by him; that the means, ill-founded in its first branch, inoperative in its second, and inadmissible, as new and mixed in fact, in its third, can not be accepted;

But, on the second plea of ​​the main appeal of the company Lufthansa and on the single plea of ​​the cross-appeal of Mr X …:

Having regard to article 1992 of the Civil Code;

Whereas, to exonerate the company Atlas Voyages, the judgment holds that there is nothing to charge the travel agency for the issue of a transport ticket with the pre-contractual obligation to inform the client of the conditions of admission to the territory of the country of destination, that the contract of carriage indicates that it is the passenger’s responsibility to comply with government requirements concerning documents for entering and leaving foreign territories, and that the title of transport was efficient;

Whereas by ruling thus, while it enters into the obligations of the travel agency, as a professional representative of its client, to whom it sells a plane ticket, to inform it of the precise conditions of use of the ticket, which includes the formalities for entering the territory of the State of destination, the court violated the aforementioned text;

FOR THESE REASONS :

BREAK AND CANCELED, but only in that it exonerated the company Atlas voyages and declared the company Lufthansa entirely responsible for the non-performance of the contract of carriage, the judgment rendered on May 26, 2003, between the parties, by the Annecy district court; returns, consequently, as for this, the cause and the parts in the state where they were before the aforementioned judgment and, to be done right, returns them before the district court of Bonneville;

Orders the company Atlas voyages and the company Lufthansa to pay the costs;

Considering article 700 of the new Code of Civil Procedure and article 37 of the law of July 10, 1991, the company Atlas Voyages rejects its request; condemns, in solidum, the company Lufthansa and the company Atlas voyages to pay to the SCP Richard the sum of 2000 euros, on condition that it renounces to perceive the contributory part of the State under legal aid;

Said that on the due diligence of the Attorney General near the Court of Cassation, this judgment will be transmitted to be transcribed in the margin or following the partially quashed judgment;

Thus done and judged by the Court of Cassation, First Civil Chamber, and pronounced by the President in his public hearing on February 7th, two thousand and six.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.


CAPTCHA Image
Reload Image