|
|
|
Before you comment on this story, please take a minute to read our rules here
|
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Lee Hayhurst
Live witness testimony from customers of Travel Republic was dismissed as irrelevant in the criminal prosecution by the judge in his 22-page verdict.
The online travel agent and its managing director, Kane Pirie, were found not guilty today of 19 charges each of breaking Atol regulations in a short hearing at City of Westminster Magistrates Court.
In a decision that appeared to contradict an earlier Court of Appeal ruling on a case Abta brought against the CAA, judge Nicholas Evans said: "I do not consider the perception of any particular customer as to what he thought he was obtaining is helpful."
The ruling pointed to various aspects of the witness testimony that both seemed to back the CAA's case and Travel Republic's case.
But the judge said the critical question was whether the holidays being sold by Travel Republic constituted a package.
At one point in the judgment, the judge also addressed the issue of how Travel Republic made it clear in its booking process that it did not sell packages as defined by the Package Travel Regulations.
"To illustrate the point, with a silly analogy, say someone wants to buy a cow," said the judge.
"He approaches a farmer who removes a horse from his field. On the side of the horse someone has painted the letters "COW". Assume both the farmer and the purchaser believe that what is being sold and purchased is a cow. The transaction is concluded.
"It doesn't matter what they think, the purchaser has bought a horse not a cow."
In his judgment on defence claims that the prosecution was an abuse of process, judge Evans said: "This was a case where it would have been perfectly possible to advance a prosecution without calling any private witness.
"From the prosecutor's perspective it was not essential that TRL [Travel Republic Ltd] customers gave live evidence. I am not saying the prosecution were wrong to obtain statements or to call those who had booked flights and hotels via their tailor-made route, just that it was not essential.
"One witness, in returning her signed statement, asked it her Atol compensation claim might be given a helping hand. If it were that hardly suggests corruption or improper behaviour."
Judge condones CAA's right to prosecute (10 Nov 2009) CAA v Travel Republic: 'Atol was complicated' (23 Oct 2009) CAA v Travel Republic: 'Still selling packages' (12 Oct 2009)
|
|
|