316 LEGAL IMPACTS OF COVID-19 IN THE TOURISM INDUSTRY As at the time of writing, therefore, British consumers remained entitled to a refund for cancelled holidays; but were not, in fact, being provided with anything other than a credit note. 3.2. Claims in Negligence So far no claims have been brought by UK consumers who have contracted COVID-19 as a result of visiting contaminated resorts. The author is, of course, aware of the claim intimated against the Tyrolean ski resort of Ischgl for knowingly exposing skiers to the virus. The claim, which has been brought by a German consumer affairs watchdog - the Austrian Consumer Protection Association -, rests on the allegation that the local authorities kept the resort opened for business despite knowing that there was an outbreak of COVID-19 occurring and that they covered up the extent of it for fear of putting tourists off visiting the region. At time of writing, over 2,500 Claimants had signed up the action, the majority of them German, and it is thought that many more travellers, including British skiers, were exposed to the virus as a result of the local authorities’ tardy response to the situation. In late February, an employee of a bar in Ischgl, popular with skiers, was found to have the virus. Nonetheless, the bar still remained open to guests, before finally closing for business a fortnight later, when the entire resort was closed down. The original staff member is now thought to have been a ‘super spreader’ responsible for infecting guests from all over Europe, in particular Germany, Austria, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Iceland and the UK. Austrian prosecutors are investigating whether there is a case against the local authorities responsible for the bar remaining open for reckless endangerment of people through infectious disease. The Tyrolean authorities deny acting recklessly and say they took very quick, ‘very radical’ action in response to the virus. The action, albeit brought in the Austrian courts, is an indication of where claims arising out of the outbreak are likely to arise. No one can reasonably blame a hotelier or other supplier, or therefore a package or cruise operator, for the occurrence of an outbreak of illness; where the supplier knows or has reasonable grounds to believe that an outbreak is occurring, or is likely to occur, however, the position is very different. We have seen in norovirus claims that a hotelier or cruise operator - unlucky enough to be visited by Patient Zero or a Super Spreader - is not generally liable for the resulting outbreak, so long as reasonable measures are taken to contain the spread of disease; but a supplier which knowingly allows guests to come into contact with an infected person is
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==