Unidroit Hotel Contracts

The Governing Council of Unidroit at its 80th Session has approved the issue of hotel contracts being put on its reserve list with a view to future work on it if resources are available. It now appears on the reserve list for the Unidroit Work Programme for 2002-2004.

(Originally posted by John Downes)

World Travel and Tourism Council: Forecast Growth in 2003

The WTTC released a series of reports on 8.11.02 predicting a strong forecast for the last quarter of 2002 and strong growth in 2003. “The relative strength in consumer spending in many countries compared with expectations earlier in the year has helped maintain personal Travel and Tourism spending”. Despite the Bali bombings and uncertainty caused by potential military action against Iraq the WTTC/Oxford Economic Forecasting reports a forecast of 4.1% real growth in 2003.

(Originally posted by John Downes)

Lockerbie: Compensation

UK families have treated, with some scepticism, claims by US lawyers that they have negotiated a new settlement for families of the victims of the Lockerbie bombing. The settlements are said to amount to £6.4m (€10.08m or $10.12m) per family. However, there have been previous claims of settlement but these have failed to materialize.

(Originally posted by John Downes)

Lockerbie: Appeal

Abdelbaset Megrahi has lodged an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights alleging breaches of his human rights in his trial by the Scottish High Court of Justiciary and in his imprisonment in Glasgow.

(Originally posted by John Downes)

Payment of Hotel Bill

In R v Vincent [2001] CA, V stayed for a week at one hotel and shortly afterwards he stayed for a month at another. In both cases he left without paying his bills. He told the court that he had told the owners of both hotels that he was waiting to receive some money and would then pay them. Thus, he believed that they had accepted the arrangement that he would make payment when he was able to do so. The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) upheld an appeal that V was not guilty of an offence under Section 2 of the Theft Act. Although hotels normally required “on the spot payment”, that expectation did not apply where an agreement had been reached to pay later. Whether or not that agreement had been induced by deception, it did not amount to theft of services under the Theft Act.

(Originally posted by John Downes)