Preview:

Casavant & another v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd. Opinion Summary: Plaintiffs brought an action against defendant, seeking a refund of two cruise tickets they purchased and cancelled, and damages under G.L.c. 93A for unfair and deceptive trade practices. The court concluded that the evidence at trial plainly established that defendant violated the Attorney General's travel service regulations in two respects: fist, it failed to disclose the refund policy; and second, having violated the disclosure statement, it failed to refund the payments made by a cancelling customer within thirty days. These violations qualified as unfair or deceptive acts, and they caused plaintiffs a loss: the lack of a prompt refund of the ticket price. The court also concluded that plaintiffs' demand letter satisfied the requirements of G.L.c. 93A, section 9(3). The purposes of the demand letter were sufficiently fulfilled where it constituted fair notice of the claim and enabled defendant to make a reasonable tender of settlement. Accordingly, the judgment for defendant on plaintiffs' claims was reversed and the case remanded for the entry of judgment for plaintiffs and for determination of their damages, reasonable attorneys' fees, and costs.
Mark CASAVANT & another [FN1] vs. NORWEGIAN CRUISE LINE LTD.
SJC-10717.
December 6, 2010. - September 1, 2011.
Consumer Protection Act, Unfair or deceptive act, Damages, Demand letter. Attorney General. Administrative Law,
Regulations.

CIVIL ACTION commenced in the Superior Court Department on October 3, 2002. The case was heard by Bruce R.
Henry, J.

After review by the Appeals Court, the Supreme Judicial Court granted leave to obtain further appellate review.

Armand P. Mele, of New York (Barbara P. Lazaris with him) for the defendant.

John D. Deacon, Jr., for the plaintiffs.

Present: Ireland, Spina, Cordy, Botsford, & Gants, JJ.

CORDY, J.

The plaintiffs, Mark and Tara Casavant, brought an action against Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd. (Norwegian), seeking a
refund for two cruise tickets they purchased and cancelled, and damages under G.L. c. 93A for unfair and deceptive
trade practices. A Superior Court judge granted Norwegian's motion to dismiss the Casavants' complaint on the
grounds of a forum selection clause in the "contract of passage." The Appeals Court reversed and remanded the case
for trial. Casavant v. Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd., 63 Mass.App.Ct. 785 (2005). At trial, Norwegian agreed to provide
a refund to the Casavants. The judge entered judgment for the Casavants on their contract claim, awarding a refund of
the purchase price of their tickets, plus interest and costs, but found that Norwegian had not committed an unfair or
deceptive act under G.L. c. 93A, and, even if it had, the Casavants suffered no loss as a result of such an act. The
Casavants appealed from the decision on their claim under G.L. c. 93A (c. 93A claim). In reversing the judgment for
Norwegian, the Appeals Court concluded that the Casavants had proved that Norwegian had committed an unfair trade
act by failing to disclose the complete terms of its refund policy, and that the unfair act had caused them a loss
because, had they known of the refund policy, the Casavants could have framed their cancellation of the cruise to
come within it. Casavant v. Norwegian Cruise Line, Ltd., 76 Mass.App.Ct. 73, 73-74, 77-78 (2009).

We granted Norwegian's application for further appellate review. We reverse the judgment on the c. 93A claim, but for
reasons somewhat different from those of the Appeals Court.

1. Background. The material facts of this case were found by the trial judge. On October 25, 2000, the Casavants booked a seven-day round-trip cruise from Boston to Bermuda with Norwegian. The cruise was scheduled to depart Boston on September 16, 2001. The Casavants paid a deposit of $628 at the time of booking and the remaining balance on July 10, 2001. The total cost of the trip was $2,135.50. At the time of the purchase, the Casavants were informed that Norwegian imposed "cancellation fees," and that a cancellation zero to fourteen days prior to departure would result in a one hundred per cent cancellation fee. The Casavants received their tickets, which included a "contract of passage," on or about September 1, 2001.
After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Casavants, fearful of taking a cruise that was scheduled to depart from Boston on September 16, contacted Norwegian several times in an effort to reschedule it. Norwegian refused to reschedule their trip, deemed them to have cancelled their voyage, and refused to refund the price of the tickets. The Casavants subsequently retained counsel and sent Norwegian a demand letter pursuant to G.L. c. 93A,

Download sjc-10717.pdf

Massachusetts Law