Find Out More

  • Accreditations
  • Join our Team
  • Terms of Business
  • Pricing Information
  • Client Feedback
    • Feedback
  • Complaints
  • Regulatory Information
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
  • Skip to footer navigation
  • Skip to secondary navigation

Harold Stock & Co. Solicitors

Rooted in the community

  • Mossley:
    01457 835597
  • Failsworth:
    0161 682 2400
  • Stockport:
    0161 456 5012
  • Get In Touch
  • Home
  • About
    • Our Team
    • CSR
  • Legal Services
    • Personal Injury
    • Medical Negligence
    • Serious Injury
    • Commercial and Company
    • Property
    • Wills, Probate And The Elderly
  • Pricing
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • More

What constitutes a package holiday? Titshall v Qwerty Travel Limited

16th July 2015 by Harold Stock & Co

We’re in the middle of high summer now, but the chances are if you look of your window right now you wouldn’t necessarily know it. Britain might not be ideal in every way, but you know there are certain things you can rely on consistently in this country, and one of those things is the unpredictability of the British weather. So it’s no wonder that the popularity of the package holiday has risen inexorably in the UK. We know that if we want guaranteed and reliable sunshine, then we have to go abroad to find it. But times are hard and money is tight, so before we splash the cash we like to know that we are going to get what we are paying for. So what are your consumer rights in relation to package holidays?

The biggest difference between package holidays and personalised travel plans where travel and accommodation are booked separately, is that a package holiday booking gives consumers the reassurance that if the airline goes bust or they become stranded abroad, their travel agent is responsible for sorting it out. But what exactly does the law define as a package holiday? Well, the Court of Appeal considered this question in 2011 in the case of Titshall v Qwerty Travel Limited.

Package Holiday Case Study.

The facts of the case were this. Mr Titshall booked a last minute, all-inclusive holiday for a week in Corfu through Qwerty Travel. He had found the holiday on a teletext advertisement and booked with Qwerty over the telephone the night before the flights were due to leave.

During his holiday, Mr Titshall sustained serious injuries as a result of falling through a sliding glass door in the hotel. The circumstances relating to how the accident happened were disputed: Mr Titshall claimed that the door was faulty and shattered when he tried to open it, whereas Qwerty claimed that the accident happened as a result of drunken row between Mr Titshall and his partner.  Despite the disputed facts Mr Titshall made a claim for personal injury compensation for the injuries he had suffered as a result of the accident. 

In defence, Qwerty Travel claimed (amongst other things) that they had no obligation to Mr Titshall because he had not booked a package holiday. Qwerty argued that they were effectively just a retail agent arranging two separate contracts; the first with First Choice for the flights, and the second with Hotels4U for 7 nights of accommodation. Qwerty Travel had given Mr Titshall a breakdown of the cost over the telephone, and argued that if Mr Titshall had asked to book just the flights or simply book the accommodation separately, he would have been told that he could. 

However, the Court disagreed. In a unanimous decision, the Court of Appeal decided that the holiday was a ‘package holiday’ and that Qwerty Travel could in principle be liable to Mr Titshall for his injuries. How did the Court come to this decision?

Well, it took into account the following factors:

  • The advertisement was at an inclusive price.
  • No suggestion was made to Mr Titshall that either the flights or accommodation were available for separate purchase, and;
  • There was a service charge which connected the provision of one service with the other. 

So what does this decision mean for holidaymakers? How does it affect their consumer rights? Well, following the decision it seems that the responsibility in fairly and squarely on the shoulders of the agent. It is now, therefore the responsibility of the agent to ensure that it is made clear that a holiday booking is not being offered as a package holiday. A service charge will also be considered an indication that the agent is selling a package holiday.

For more information about how your package holiday rights are protected see:

https://www.haroldstock.com/uncategorised/package-holiday-rights-and-company-responsibilities-how-to-claim-if-youre-unhappy-with-your-package-holiday/

Filed Under: Case Studies Tagged With: package holidays, personal injury compensation

Harold Stock & Co

Related

Government U-turn on Personal Injury Reforms
18th October 2016
Tags: personal injury, personal injury claims, personal injury compensation, whiplash
Categories: Blog, Personal Injury
Karen Kenyon
Package Holiday Rights and Company Responsibilities: How to Claim if You’re Unhappy With Your Package Holiday.
13th July 2015
Tags: compensation, package holidays, PTR
Categories: Uncategorised
Injured at Work? Could You Be Entitled To Personal Injury Compensation?
10th June 2015
Tags: accident at work, personal injury, personal injury compensation
Categories: Personal Injury

Footer

  • Accreditations
  • Join our Team
  • Terms of Business
  • Pricing Information
  • Client Feedback
    • Feedback
  • Complaints
  • Regulatory Information
  • Acceptable Use
  • Complaints
  • Email Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy/Cookies
  • Regulatory Information
  • Terms of Website Use
harold stock solicitors

Mossley (Head Office)

55-57 Stamford Street
Mossley
Tameside OL5 0LN

Tel: 01457 835597
Fax: 0330 024 9210

harold stock solicitors

Failsworth

Ivy Business Centre
Crown Street
Failsworth M35 9BG

Tel: 0161 682 2400
Fax: 0330 024 9210

harold stock solicitors

Stockport

Pepper House
1 Pepper Road
Stockport SK7 5DP

Tel: 0161 456 5012
Fax: 0330 024 9210

Email: info@haroldstock.com

Harold Stock & Co Solicitors is a trading name of Harold Stock & Co Limited, a Limited Company registered in England and Wales. Company No: 07201476. Registered Office: 55-57 Stamford Street, Mossley, Tameside, OL5 0LN. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (535629). VAT No: 991 015 916 A full list of Directors is available at the Company’s Registered Office.

  • Acceptable Use
  • Complaints
  • Email Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy/Cookies
  • Regulatory Information
  • Terms of Website Use

Company Registered in England and Wales. No. 07201476
Copyright © 2026
Log in
Instilled Ltd

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.Accept
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT