Found an error?
Report now
The aim of the European hotel industry is to obtain compensation for forced price fixing between 2004 and 2024 by suing Booking.com. (archive picture)
Keystone
Europe's hotel industry wants to take the travel portal Booking.com to court. By the deadline of August 29, more than 15,000 hotels from all over Europe had joined a class action lawsuit, according to the European hotel alliance Hotrec.
The aim of the lawsuit is to obtain compensation for forced price fixing between 2004 and 2024. It is being coordinated by the "Stichting Hotel Claims Alliance", supported by Hotrec and more than 30 national associations, including the German hotel association IHA.
According to Hotrec, the statement of claim is to be submitted to the Amsterdam District Court by the end of the year. According to the lawsuit website, hoteliers could reclaim up to 30 percent of the commission paid plus interest.
Most of the registrations come from Italy with around 3,000 hotels, followed by Germany, the Netherlands, Greece and Austria, according to the Italian hotel association Federalberghi. According to the IHA, around 2000 hotels from Germany are participating - in addition to a further 2000 hotels that are already conducting parallel proceedings against Booking.com in Amsterdam and Berlin in 2020.
The background to this is a ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the fall of 2024, according to which so-called best price clauses could violate EU competition law. These prohibited hotels from offering their rooms at a lower price on their own website, for example, in order to prevent so-called free-rider bookings. However, the case must be finally settled by an Amsterdam court. The travel portal abolished the clauses in 2024 due to the Digital Markets Act.
Hotrec President Alexandros Vassilikos spoke of an "overwhelming response". The hotel industry is united and is demanding "that the dominant gatekeeper changes its market behavior and takes responsibility for its misconduct".
Booking.com rejected the accusations and stated that the ECJ ruling does not pave the way for claims for damages.