Case of woman raped on holiday in Sri Lanka to go to top European court

A British woman who was raped by an electrician while on a package holiday in Sri Lanka has succeeded in having her case referred to the European Court of Justice, The Scotland Herald reported.

In a case which could have major implications for the travel industry, the woman is claiming £29,000 in damages from Kuoni Travel Ltd, the tour operator through which she booked the luxury holiday.

The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was sexually assaulted by an electrician employed at a hotel in Sri Lanka, who purported to show her back to her room but instead lured her into an engineering room where he attacked her.
She subsequently discovered she was pregnant and had to undergo testing to determine that the baby’s father was her husband.

Her case hinges on whether the attack constituted a breach of contract on the part of Kuoni and whether the company should be liable for the employee’s actions.

The High Court originally ruled that Kuoni could not be held liable under Package Tours Regulations (PTRs) as the attack was an unforeseeable event that could not have been prevented by the hotel.

The Court of Appeal subsequently ruled in the tour operator’s favour on the three main facets of the case. In a majority decision, it said the electrician was not a supplier within the meaning of provisions of the PTRs. These did not cover his conduct as it fell outside the duties for which he had been employed by the Hotel.

However, Lord Justice Longmore issued a dissenting opinion stating: “The whole point of ... the regulation is that the holidaymaker should have a remedy against his contractual opposite and it should be left to the tour operator to sort out the consequences with those whom it has itself contracted.”

Now following a hearing in April the Supreme Court has ruled that there is a case for the travel company to answer. The Supreme Court will ask the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to clarify the law on two points of the case – including whether the employee can be considered a ‘supplier’ of the package holiday contract.