Legal Quiz

Legal Quiz

Storyline One

FAST Eddie’s Coach Tours has organised a special series of holidays based around the eclipse on August 11. One of the hotels being used is in St Ives, and customers can either travel via their own transport or go by coach.

The first couple, Mr and Mrs Smith, decide to make their own travel arrangements and book one night’s accommodation, on August 11. They are due to travel from Essex and set out at 4am on August 11 to get to St Ives in time for the big event, which has been forecast to start at around 11am. The traffic is horrendous and at the time of the eclipse, they are still 100 miles away from the hotel.

The second couple, Mr and Mrs Jones, book coach travel and accommodation at the hotel on August 10 and 11. However, they had intended to watch the eclipse through special glasses but in the light of Government health warnings, decide they cannot do so and seek to cancel the holiday.

The third couples, Mr and Mrs Hardy, book the same package as Mr and Mrs Smith but on the morning of August 11, it is so cloudy that they see nothing of the eclipse.


Question 1

Do Mr and Mrs Smith have a claim for not being in St Ives to see the eclipse due to the terrible traffic they encounter?

Question 2

Are Mr and Mrs Jones entitled to cancel the holiday?

Question 3

Are Mr and Mrs Hardy entitled to claim for failure to see the eclipse?



Question one: There is no package and it was the Smiths’ responsibility to get themselves to the hotel on time.

Question two: No

Question three: No – provided the tour operator did not guarantee there would be a clear sky and/or they would no matter what, be able to see the eclipse.


Storyline Two

COSY Cottages organises summer holidays in its self-catering homes in the UK.

Mr and Mrs Old and their two children, Janet and Mance, aged nine and seven years’ old respectively – book a cottage in North Devon.

They are particularly keen on visiting National Trust properties in the area.

Upon arriving at the cottage they are generally dissatisfied with its level of cleanliness and feel that the property does not match the description in the Cosy Cottages brochure.

It is not so bad that they feel that they have to move and therefore rather than doing anything about the cottage while they are on holiday, they wait until their return to complain to Cosy Cottages.

When they complain they also include a complaint about two incidents which occurred at National Trust properties.

The first incident happened at a stately home where there was building work going on.

Mance, despite clear warnings to the contrary, ran under some scaffolding, and as a result, was hit on the head by a falling brick.

The second incident arose as the family was walking through farmlands which were part of a National Trust property.

They were chased by bullocks and Janet fell and cut her right knee badly in the scramble to escape.

Question 1

Does Cosy Cottages have any liability for the unsatisfactory state of the property?

Question 2

Do the Olds have any claim for Mance’s injury?

Question 3

Do the Olds have any claim for Janet’s injury?


Question one: Probably – although it is not a package, brochure representations will bind Cosy Cottages and there may also be criminal liability under the Trade Descriptions Act.

Question two: There will certainly be no claim against Cosy Cottages. Any claim against the National Trust seems most unlikely as Mance/her parents were the authors of her misfortune.

Question three: Again, there is no claim against Cosy Cottages. Whether there is a claim against the National Trust would depend on the accessibility of the animals.


This is a community-moderated forum.
All post are the individual views of the respective commenter and are not the expressed views of Travel Weekly.
By posting your comments you agree to accept our Terms & Conditions.

More in air