Commercial analysis: the Court of Justice has ruled that an air carrier which was unable to prove that a passenger was informed of the cancellation of their flight more than two weeks before the scheduled time of departure was required to pay compensation to that passenger. This applied not only when the contract for carriage was concluded directly between the passenger and the air carrier, but also when it was concluded through an online travel agency.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial
EXISTING USER? SIGN IN
TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Take a free trial
Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK
Complete all the fields above to proceed to the next step.
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
Hearsay evidence in civil litigationThis Practice Note provides guidance on the interpretation and application of the relevant provisions of the CPR. Depending on the court in which your matter is proceeding, you may also need to be mindful of additional provisions—see further below.This Practice
AML and counter-terrorist financing—source of funds and source of wealthSource of funds and wealth was a key focus of the SRA’s Preventing Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism thematic review, published in March 2018. Its findings included that:•most firms understood the distinction between
AffrayAffray is an offence created by the Public Order Act 1986 (POA 1986). It can be tried in either the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court. The magistrates’ court may decline jurisdiction where for example in cases involving a weapon/throwing objects, or conduct that causes serious
TCC—preparing for and attending a pre-trial review (PTR)Note:•this Practice Note gives specific guidance on matters proceeding in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) under the provisions set out in CPR 60, CPR PD 60 and the TCC Guide. As these provisions are additional to the general
0330 161 1234
To view our latest legal guidance content,sign-in to Lexis®PSL or register for a free trial.