Interesting Court Decision In Germany - Passenger does not need to fly last leg
Oct 2, 2019, 11:50 am
#346
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Munich, Algarve, Sussex or S.F Bay Area
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, A3*Gold, AA Plat, HH Gold, IHG Plat Amb, Marriott Plat
Posts: 4,164
As an update to this thread. Lufthansa today rescinded their appeal of the lower court judgement after receiving indications they would lose the case. A judgement against them in the higher court would have set precedent and it is generally felt here in Germany that they were very keen to avoid that.
So, end of the discussion on whether skipping the last sector is morally wrong, fraud or whatever some other posters have referred to it as. Well, for tickets purchased in Germany at least.
So, end of the discussion on whether skipping the last sector is morally wrong, fraud or whatever some other posters have referred to it as. Well, for tickets purchased in Germany at least.
Oct 2, 2019, 1:00 pm
#347
Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club, easyJet and Ryanair
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: UK/Las Vegas
Programs: BA Gold (GGL/CCR)
Posts: 15,930
I disagree. The law has not been clarified and no binding precedent has been set, simply that LH have withdrawn their appeal.
Oct 2, 2019, 1:34 pm
#348
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Munich, Algarve, Sussex or S.F Bay Area
Programs: Mucci, BA Gold, A3*Gold, AA Plat, HH Gold, IHG Plat Amb, Marriott Plat
Posts: 4,164
My point was exactly that Lufthansa withdrew their appeal so as to avoid precedent being set. There has been so much publicity surrounding this case in Germany, mostly negative towards Lufthansa, that not getting the precedent in their favour will surely embolden those passengers thinking of dropping final sectors.
Oct 3, 2019, 6:38 am
#349
Ambassador, Hong Kong and Macau
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Programs: Non-top tier Asia Miles member
Posts: 19,805
I thought there was no Stare in civil law jurisdictions like Germany. Don't get me wrong tho, I'd love dropping sectors legalised in Hong Kong.
Oct 3, 2019, 6:50 am
#350
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: London, UK and Southern France
Posts: 18,364
Not formally but the reality is not very different from common law jurisdictions in that respect: civil law jurisdictions are not formally bound by precedent from either themselves or higher courts but, in practice, they follow them. You could not have a legal order in which courts decide cases in a certain way on one day and a totally different way the next. A reasonable degree of consistency is essential in law so even if you do not have a formal legal obligation to follow precedent, the instinct to follow precedent is in the DNA of most courts and judges. And where there are persistent disagreement between different courts at the same level (or different formations within a court), sooner or later the matter is normally brought higher up in the judicial hierarchy of courts to settle the issue precisely because the situation where courts adopt different decisions on the same issue is normally regarded as unsustainable.