Back
Automatically translated version. May contain inaccuracies compared to the original.
Shcepetivka City District Court of Khmelnytskyi Oblast on October 14 denied the woman who demanded the tour operator reimburse the cost of tickets, fuel surcharge, and compensate for moral damage due to allegedly unsatisfactory conditions of the bus trip to Bulgaria. The plaintiff complained that the bus was in unsatisfactory technical condition, a breakdown occurred en route, and beforehand paid seats in the salon were changed without her consent.
As stated in the decision, published in the Unified State Register of Court Decisions, in June 2026 year the woman filed a lawsuit against private enterprise "E.LAIN-TOUR," in which she asked the defendant to recover the cost of tickets in the amount of 14 000 hryvnias, the amount of paid fuel surcharge in the amount of 3 160 hryvnias, and also moral damages in the amount of 10 000 hryvnias.
According to the plaintiff, 30 on May 2026 year she, together with her mother and two minor children, traveled by bus to Bulgaria operated by the defendant. The defendant provided services of inadequate quality: the NEOPLAN coach was in unsatisfactory technical condition, the toilet, air conditioning, and internet connection system did not work, doors jammed, and during the journey there was a breakdown, which forced passengers to wait for a transfer, and the total travel time was 35,5 hours. In addition, according to the woman, her previously paid seats in the salon were unjustifiably changed, causing her to be separated from one of the minor children.
Among the plaintiff’s demands:
14 000 hryvnias - cost of tickets;
3 160 hryvnias (equivalent to 60 euros) - paid fuel surcharge;
10 000 hryvnias - compensation for moral damages;
The defendant’s representative, lawyer Kostyuk V.V., opposed the claim in full, arguing that the fact of providing services of inadequate quality is not proven. In the response, the company insisted that the claim was filed against an inappropriate defendant, since the actual transportation was carried out by a sole entrepreneur who provided documents on the vehicle’s serviceability before departure — the technical inspection protocol dated 26 May 2026 year and the corresponding international insurance. According to the defendant, after the technical malfunction occurred, the carrier promptly organized transferring passengers to another bus, and the obligation to transport passengers to the destination was fully fulfilled.
The defendant’s representative asserted that the plaintiff’s claims about the vehicle’s poor technical condition were not supported by any expert opinion, complaints from other passengers, or inspection acts.
Why the court did not find the plaintiff’s evidence sufficient
The court found that 27 November 2025 year a contract No. 11/25-41684 was concluded between the travel agent acting on behalf of the tour operator LLC "E.LAIN-TOUR" and the plaintiff. The director of the enterprise is Ruslan Vitaliiovych Savchuk, and the enterprise has a license from the State Service of Tourism and Resorts for tour operator activities. The court noted that before departure the vehicle underwent the mandatory technical inspection, which is evidenced by the insurance policy and the inspection protocol dated 26 May 2026 year, and the mere fact of a technical malfunction en route does not indicate that the bus did not meet the requirements for the start of the trip.
The court also noted that:
the plaintiff did not provide any expert opinion or act prepared with the participation of the driver about the bus’ technical malfunction;
photos and video materials only recorded the plaintiff with the children on the highway and the general appearance of the bus, but did not contain timestamps and did not prove the defendant’s fault;
the conditions of transportation, specified in the route and timetable, warned in advance of the approximate travel time 24-26 hours and that the toilets were closed;
the plaintiff did not provide any receipts or financial documents confirming payment of 3 160 hryvnias as a fuel surcharge;
the delay due to border and customs controls does not depend on the carrier’s will.
The court noted that the plaintiff confirmed the fact of delivering her and family members to the destination, and therefore the main obligation under the transportation contract was fulfilled. Regarding moral damages, the court stated that for its reimbursement a set of conditions is required – existence of damage, illegality of the act, causal link, and fault of the offender — none of which the plaintiff proved.
What the court decided
The court concluded that the plaintiff’s claims were unfounded and denied the claim against Private Enterprise "E.LAIN-TOUR" for consumer rights protection and compensation of moral damages in full. Since the plaintiff is exempt from paying court fees under the Law of Ukraine "On Protection of Consumer Rights," the court fee was charged to the state. The decision can be appealed to the Khmelnytskyi Appellate Court within thirty days from the date of pronouncement.
Earlier Informator reported that the Kyiv-Sviatoshynskyi District Court denied the owner of a Land Rover a claim against a car dealer who demanded more than 200 thousand euros in penalties for not providing a replacement vehicle during the warranty repair, since the plaintiff did not sign properly executed documents for the transfer of the car to the service. We also wrote that the Zaporozhye court denied a coffee machine Philips buyer’s request for a refund because he did not prove the material defect, and the parties agreed on another repair deadline.
Document: PDF proof of the original version of the news item "Туристка вимагала з туроператора Е.ЛАЙН-ТУР 27 тисяч гривень за погану поїздку до Болгарії - що вирішив суд". It records the publication content at the moment of the first scan, the preservation date and the source: Informator.
