November 2020 international travel rules

silvercar

Until we see the legislation, everything is guess work.
It may be that the "only travel abroad for work" is advisory and phrased as "you shouldn't" as opposed to "you must not". Also there is no message on the offence if you break the rules. So is it a £100 fine or a £10,000 fine?
Arguably those planning a long haul luxury holiday or a visit to family may stomach the £100 fine as part of the cost.
From what we have seen at the moment, for those in a low tier in England, it may be legal to travel to Scotland just before the lockdown starts and then make your journey from there.

epm-84

bradders1983 said:

Quite sure nobody at the airport demands your reason for travelling but I am happy to be proven wrong.

They may ask the purpose of your journey and the length of your trip if you are travelling to a non-EU/EEA destination and may ask for proof of any paperwork you need to enter your destination, which now includes PLR forms for EU/EEA destinations.

epm-84

silvercar said:

Until we see the legislation, everything is guess work.
It may be that the "only travel abroad for work" is advisory and phrased as "you shouldn't" as opposed to "you must not". 

As mentioned in the original post the guidance mentions you'll need a legally permitted reason to travel abroad and the only example it gives as a possible legally permitted reason is for work. It's possible the comprehensive list of legally permitted reasons will be debated in parliament this week. If you seriously think holidays or a normal visit to see friends or family will be legally permitted reasons then you're being very optimistic.  While I'm sure Labour may question what will happen to travel workers, I doubt they'll try or be able to block any attempt to ban non-essential international travel.

cubegame

Highly unlikely that any travel restriction will be anything but a guideline. Putting a restriction over leaving the country into law will open the floodgates on legal challenges and bring the whole house of cards crashing down on other legally dubious COVID legislation.

silvercar

cubegame said:

Highly unlikely that any travel restriction will be anything but a guideline. Putting a restriction over leaving the country into law will open the floodgates on legal challenges and bring the whole house of cards crashing down on other legally dubious COVID legislation.

The problem is that the guidelines will influence whether people choose to fly, which may have a knock on effect on flights 2 weeks out. eg if you are already abroad, chances are that your return flight is safe, but if people go on the outbound in the next few days, will their return be changed or cancelled? Will airlines take empty planes outbound in order to bring people home. If they don't, then how will those going outbound get home. 

epm-84

Last time a legal expert did threaten a challenge against the law not allowing sunbathing or relaxing in parks, even when a 2m distance was maintained, citing that the restriction went beyond what was needed to prevent the spread of COVID-19 but I think restrictions got relaxed before any challenge was launched.  However, as airlines have said they will sell every seat on a plane if they can there is perhaps science for restricting travel.

CKhalvashi

silvercar said:

cubegame said:

Highly unlikely that any travel restriction will be anything but a guideline. Putting a restriction over leaving the country into law will open the floodgates on legal challenges and bring the whole house of cards crashing down on other legally dubious COVID legislation.

The problem is that the guidelines will influence whether people choose to fly, which may have a knock on effect on flights 2 weeks out. eg if you are already abroad, chances are that your return flight is safe, but if people go on the outbound in the next few days, will their return be changed or cancelled? Will airlines take empty planes outbound in order to bring people home. If they don't, then how will those going outbound get home. 

There's also the airline element of not wanting to cancel a flight as it means refunding passengers.

This would naturally mean that a number of routes will operate virtually empty, as the airline has been paid for them.

Leodogger

We were due to fly on Friday (rotten luck eh?) to Spain to visit our daughter for a couple of months and wondered if we would be stopped at the airport and therefore lose our flights?    Is there any guidance on whether you are just fined or what, as to change the flights Ryanair kindly said we could change without charge until in the small print it says "under 7 days" you have to pay the admin charge of £35 per person plus the extra charge on the price of the new flights !    We were going to just push the flights back to 4th Dec and stomach the admin charge but now they are talking it could be extended so Christmas out the window !   Did ring Ryanair to ask if they would be cancelling the flight for us to get a refund or a free change of flight date but he said they had no guidance on it at the moment and haven't heard anything, yet we only got 6 days notice from Boris's announcement to try to change the dates and it seems totally unfair that no refund is being offered if we are not entitled to fly through no fault of our own!   If we change again this will be the 5th attempt to try to book our break in Spain too, so I am pretty peed off ! 😒😒😒

bradders1983

Dont think anyone will actually stop you at the airport tbh. Just have to get there and there is a tiny tiny chance someone stops you on the road.

Westin

cubegame said:

Highly unlikely that any travel restriction will be anything but a guideline. Putting a restriction over leaving the country into law will open the floodgates on legal challenges and bring the whole house of cards crashing down on other legally dubious COVID legislation.

I think Cubegame raises a very valid point and suspect this is how it will pan out.  

‘Guidance’ over exposure to potential legal action from airlines and others if a full ban.  Ironically watering down to guidance or a recommendation would also let the government off the hook for potential claims and compensation and push the problem of refunds back to a fight between the airline and the passenger on those services which still fly.