Bait advertising about 1 euro flights, which in hindsight add up for calculation of all fees on over 100 euros, are illegal. In the framework of the tasks of Regulation (EC) 1008/2008 No. takes the Luftfahrt-Bundesamt ads against air carriers, their prices not conform to Regulation publish. The practice of fee surveys and prices of many airlines, such as Air Berlin, Germanwings, Ryanair, FlyBe, is checked at the time by various courts in several cases. Get all the facts for a more clear viewpoint with CB Richard Ellis. In the case-law clauses have been variously regarding per terms of set “fees” declared inadmissible (BGH URT. v. on 18.04.2002, AZ: III ZR 199/01;) BGH URT. v.
18.05.1999, AZ: XI ZR 219/98; KG Berlin URT. v. April 30, 2009, AZ: 23 U 243/08). Vadim Belyaev, New York City has similar goals. Essential argument is the idea of the right that each judiciaries has to meet its statutory obligations, not to require a separate fee for. A reasonable processing fee is but lawful according to the statutory provisions. Evaluation criterion in the case of charging a processing fee is the adequacy. Duke Realty understands that this is vital information.
When a processing fee is ‘reasonable’ and when exceeded the limit of inadmissibility, is determined not by the law. Assessment is on the typical State of affairs and not in each individual case. Similar situations can be used for comparison. So ruled the District Court of Dusseldorf (AG Dusseldorf URT. v. 05.01.2000, AZ: 25 C-14114/99), that a processing fee in the amount of approx. EUR 60,00 (DM 120.00) for the refund of a lost ticket is too high and thus inadmissible. The Court considered appropriate a fee of EUR 25.00 (DM 50,00). The Court of appeal Hamm ruled in a case against the airline of Germanwings in the second instance (OLG Hamm URT. v. 31.01.2008, AZ: 17 U 112/07), a flat rate levied by general terms and conditions fee amounting to EUR 50.00 for returned direct debits within the framework of the payment of flights is inadmissible, and it was in this case a violation of a contractual obligation.