- The District Court of Frankfurt has issued a ruling on the cancellation of trips due to Corona.
- Relevant for cancellations before an official travel warning and § 651h para. 1 sentence 3 BGB.
- Cancellation costs and refunds are often unclear and subject to dispute.
- A "hasty" resignation usually leads to compensation.
- Legal experts disagreed on the legal situation regarding travel.
- The court found that there must be a significant restriction.
- The ruling is highly relevant for many of those affected.
One of the first rulings I know of on the subject of cancelling trips because of Corona comes from the Frankfurt District Court. Even though the legal issues are not part of the basic repertoire of my blog, I publish once the ruling, because I know that it affects a lot of people.
The ruling is relevant for cases in which cancellations were already made before an official travel warning was issued and now either cancellation costs are to be incurred or deposits are not to be refunded or are to be refunded only in part. In the case of a “hasty” withdrawal, as a rule, compensation is due in accordance with § 651h para. 1 sentence 3 BGB an. Different presumed lawyers in recent months, the legal situation can be only if at the time of cancellation was already a significant restriction (here it was about a trip to Italy) foreseeable. This has now been confirmed by the court.
You can read the verdict here.
