ITALIAN LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS 165 Art. 28 – and those of Art. 88bis of course – as “emergency” provisions, with the consequences that will be discussed later. Soon after the entry into force of Art. 28, some carriers, especially non-national carriers, were reluctant to reimburse passengers who could no longer fly or to issue vouchers in their favour, in those cases in which the contracts could still, in theory, be performed because carriers had not cancelled the flights. So the Italian National Authority for Civil Aviation (ENAC) sent out a note to the major touristic operators and carriers, in which it was specified that the right to reimbursement or to receive a voucher was to be granted by carriers, independently from the carrier’s nationality, being sufficient that carriers were flying to and from Italy. ENAC also informed that refusal to comply with the reimbursement obligations under Regulation No. 261/2004 could trigger sanctions, as provided for in the Regulation itself. It goes without saying that due to the global spread of the COVID-19 and due to containment measures all over the world, passengers are currently unable to fly, and carriers are being forced to cancel thousands of flights every day with the outcome that there are millions of passengers that are not flying as planned. Many carriers today risk their business, and millions of jobs are in jeopardy, with an estimated amount of damages for the aviation sectors approximately at 25 billion euros. In such circumstance, carriers had taken the possibility to opt for the voucher solution as a way to avoid, or at least postpone, potential insolvency issues, also for those cases not disciplined by the Regulation No. 261, i.e. cases in which the passenger himself decides to withdraw. It is important to mention that, before the entry into force of Art. 28, according to Art. 945 of the Navigation Code, the passenger whose departure becomes impossible for reasons not depending on his will or fault has the right to terminate the contract and to receive reimbursement of the price paid – no words on the possibility to offer vouchers. The idea of issuing a voucher, instead of the reimbursement of the price in cash, could entail a conflict with Art. 945 NC. However, the provisions contained in Art. 28, and today those in Art. 88bis, are self-proclaimed overriding mandatory rules, which have the effect of being applicable to the situation, irrespective of the content of applicable law. Overriding mandatory provisions are defined by Art. 9(1) of the Rome I Regulation such as “provisions the respect for which is regarded as crucial by a country for safeguarding its public interests, such as its political, social or economic organisation, to such
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==