A couple who won landmark compensation for a ‘nightmare cruise’ has had £12,000 slashed from their £22,000 payout after a judge ruled the settlement amount ‘excessive’.

The ruling could have far reaching implications regarding the amount awarded in compensation to people whose holidays fall below their expectations.

The Daily Mail reports that Terence and Cynthia Milner won £22,000 in compensation after their £60,000 luxury world cruise left them ‘ill and feeling like gypsies’ when they were ‘shuttled between cabins’ during rough seas.

On Thursday (21/04/10) at London’s Court of Appeal, cruise company Cunard won an appeal against the payout, after Lord Justice Ward agreed that the award was ' manifestly excessive'.

Cunard had argued that Mr and Mrs Milner had already been reimbursed £48,240 for the part of the cruise they had missed.

The court heard that 68-year-old clothing entrepreneur Mr Milner and his 70-year-old wife – from Alwoodley in Leeds – booked the ‘round-the-world trip’ on the luxury maiden voyage of the Queen Victoria in 2008 at a cost of £59,052. The couple said that, for the price, they expected ‘star treatment’ on the ship, which boasts a theatre, spa and champagne bar.

However, Mr Milner claimed that the negative effects of the voyage left both he and his wife ‘inconsolable’. They both became ill after Mr Milner developed mouth ulcers and his wife suffered breathing difficulties.

The first night on board, the pair were unable to sleep after a banging noise in their cabin persisted during bad weather. Staff gave them a mid-range Princess suite, but they had to keep their belongings in their own cabin. A week later, they were upgraded to a Penthouse suite, complete with butler and enhanced dining facilities. However, they were still unable to unpack because another couple had booked the suite and would be joining the cruise. Eventually they were returned to their original cabin.

When the banging noise continued, Mr and Mrs Milner were offered an alternative Princess Suite with disabled facilities, which the couple declined saying it 'didn't feel right'.

Mrs and Mrs Milner disembarked at Honolulu in Hawaii and spent six weeks in a luxury hotel, before taking the QEII back to their starting point, Southampton. They spent only one month of the 103-day cruise on the ship.

Mrs Milner says she is unable to wear any of the 21 evening gowns she bought for the trip at a cost of £4,300 as they are an ' unwelcome reminder' of the cruise.

Their legal representative had argued that a 'unique and irreplaceable’ holiday had become a 'stressful experience trapped aboard a vessel without any settled accommodation'.

They were originally awarded £22,000 in compensation in May 2009, after taking legal action against Cunard.

The reduction in their compensation may have future implications in cases of holidaymakers taking action against travel companies for disappointing holidays. Lord Justice Ward ruled that the cost of holidays should not be used as a benchmark for calculating compensation in such cases. He also added that holidaymakers who ‘abandon’ their trip should not be able to claim for loss of enjoyment of the rest of the trip.

© 5r1 Limited 2010