Ferry passengers, just like air passengers, are in terms of EU law entitled to various rights when a trip is delayed or cancelled by the carrier.
EU Regulation 1177/2010 concerning the rights of passengers when travelling by sea and inland waterways has recently been the subject of a judgment delivered by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) whereby much needed clarifications on this law have been provided.
EU law safeguards passengers travelling by sea and by inland waterways and ensures that they are entitled to certain rights. These rights apply to passengers travelling within the EU on large ferries or cruise ships whether at sea, on rivers or lakes or in canals.
The applicable rights are various and vary from the right to reimbursement or rerouting in situations of cancellation or of delay at departure of more than 90 minutes to, in certain cases, the right for compensation of between 25 and 50 per cent of the ticket price in situations of delay in arrival or cancellation of journeys.
In the latter situation, passengers may also be entitled to assistance including meals, refreshments and, where necessary, accommodation for up to three nights.
The facts of this case were briefly as follows.
Irish Ferries provides passenger services from ports in Ireland to the UK and France. In order to be able to operate a new itinerary between Dublin and Cherbourg, it ordered a new vessel which was to be delivered between May and June 2018. Irish Ferries began marketing pre-sale tickets for the 2018 summer season from October 2017 onwards.
As a result of a delay of the shipyard’s accommodation outfitters, Irish Ferries had to cancel, as a first step, the sailings for July, and then, as a second step, the entire season of sailings. The vessel in question was not delivered until December 2018 and Irish Ferries was unable to find any other replacement vessel capable of providing the same service.
Although the law exempts a carrier from paying compensation when it can prove that the performance of the service was hindered by extraordinary circumstances, the late delivery of a passenger transport vessel which led to the cancellation of certain sailings does not fall within the concept of ‘extraordinary circumstances’
All the passengers were informed of the cancellation of their tickets at least seven weeks before the originally scheduled departure date. Irish Ferries offered either to reroute the passengers to and/or from other ports or the full reimbursement of their tickets.
Following a decision by the Irish National Transport Authority that Irish Ferries had not complied fully with its rerouting and compensation obligations in terms of EU law, Irish Ferries filed proceedings before the Irish courts for an annulment of this decision. In the course of these proceedings, the national courts filed a preliminary reference before the CJEU requesting guidance on Regulation 1177/2010.
The CJEU affirmed that Regulation 1177/2010 applies in situations such as the ones under examination, namely, where a carrier cancels a passenger service because the delivery of the vessel required to provide a service was delayed and could not be replaced. It rejected Irish Ferries’ claims that the obligations imposed on maritime passenger carriers, in the event of cancellation of a service, are too onerous and impose on such carriers considerable financial burdens which are entirely disproportionate to the objective pursued by the law itself.
The CJEU observed that the relevant measures are intended to give passengers the choice between reaching the final destination or requesting reimbursement of the ticket price.
The right to compensation varies depending on the length of the delay in arrival at the final destination as established in the transport contract and is a proportionate approach aimed at compensating for the harmful consequences caused by the delay or cancellation.
The CJEU then proceeded to affirm that where a passenger service is cancelled and there is no alternative service on the same route, the carrier is obliged to offer to the passenger an alternative service that follows a different itinerary from that of the cancelled service or a maritime service coupled with other modes of transport, such as rail or road transport. The service provider itself must bear any additional costs incurred by the passenger in rerouting to the final destination.
The court clarified that where a carrier cancels a passenger service, even though giving several weeks’ notice before the originally scheduled departure, a passenger is also entitled to compensation. This is the case where the said passenger decides to be rerouted at the earliest opportunity or to postpone the journey to a later date and the passenger arrives at the originally scheduled destination with a delay that exceeds the thresholds laid down in the EU regulation.
The CJEU observed that although the law exempts a carrier from paying such compensation when it can prove that the performance of the service was hindered by extraordinary circumstances, the late delivery of a passenger transport vessel which led to the cancellation of certain sailings does not fall within the concept of ‘extraordinary circumstances’. However, the court conceded that a carrier would not be obliged to pay compensation where a passenger opts for reimbursement of the price of the ticket.
The CJEU clarified that the concept of ‘ticket price’ includes the costs relating to the additional optional services chosen by the passenger, such as the booking of a cabin or a kennel, or access to premium lounges.
Regulation 1177/2010 puts ferry passengers on a par with passengers using other modes of transport such as air. Awareness of and legal certainty in relation to such rights benefit both carriers and passengers alike.
Mariosa Vella Cardona is a freelance legal consultant.