Casavant v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd.

460 Mass. 500 (2011) · Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts · September 1, 2011

Summary

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that Norwegian Cruise Line violated Massachusetts travel-service regulations by failing to disclose its complete refund policy and by failing to issue a timely refund after the plaintiffs cancelled their cruise. The court concluded that these violations constituted unfair or deceptive acts under G. L. c. 93A and caused the plaintiffs a compensable loss. The court also held that the plaintiffs’ demand letter adequately described their claim and remanded for determination of damages, attorney’s fees, and costs.

Holdings

  1. Norwegian violated 940 Code Mass. Regs. § 15.04 by failing to disclose the complete terms of its refund policy before accepting payment and by failing to refund the Casavants' payments within thirty days after their cancellation.
  2. The regulatory violations caused the Casavants a loss within the meaning of G. L. c. 93A because Norwegian's failure to provide the required prompt refund deprived them of the ticket price.
  3. The Casavants' demand letter satisfied G. L. c. 93A, § 9(3), because it fairly notified Norwegian of the conduct complained of, the injury suffered, and the relief sought; it was not required to identify every specific statutory or regulatory violation.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Norwegian's failure to disclose its complete cancellation or refund policy violated 940 Code Mass. Regs. § 15.04(2)(e) and constituted an unfair or deceptive act or practice under G. L. c. 93A.
  2. Whether the regulatory violations caused the Casavants a compensable loss under G. L. c. 93A.
  3. Whether the Casavants' demand letter satisfied G. L. c. 93A, § 9(3), even though it did not identify the specific Attorney General regulation later relied upon.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (15)

  • Anastos v. Sable, 443 Mass. 146, 149 (2004)(followed)
  • R.W. Granger & Sons v. J & S Insulation, Inc., 435 Mass. 66, 73 (2001)(followed)
  • Schwanbeck v. Federal-Mogul Corp., 31 Mass. App. Ct. 390, 414 (1991), S.C., 412 Mass. 703 (1992)(followed)
  • Hershenow v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. of Boston, Inc., 445 Mass. 790, 796, 802 (2006)(followed)
  • Iannacchino v. Ford Motor Co., 451 Mass. 623, 630-631 n.12 (2008)(followed)
  • International Fidelity Insurance Co. v. Wilson, 387 Mass. 841, 850 (1983)(followed)
  • Purity Supreme, Inc. v. Attorney Gen., 380 Mass. 762, 775 (1980)(followed)
  • Slaney v. Westwood Auto, Inc., 366 Mass. 688, 704 (1975)(followed)
  • Spring v. Geriatric Authority of Holyoke, 394 Mass. 274, 288 (1985)(followed)
  • York v. Sullivan, 369 Mass. 157, 162-163 (1975)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 15.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…