Trivago loses appeal after misleading consumers over cheap hotel room rate advertisements
Summary
Trivago, the travel price comparison website for hotels, failed to overturn The Federal Court’s first instance finding that they mislead Australian Consumers about cheap hotel deals on its website and in its television advertising campaigns that aired over 400,000 times between late 2013 and mid 2018.
Article
In January 2020, Moshinsky J held that Trivago had misled consumers by representing that its website would quickly and easily help users identify the cheapest rates available for a given hotel.
Specifically, it was found that Trivago did not sufficiently disclose to users that its website used an algorithm that gave prominence to accommodation providers paying Trivago a higher payment fee (cost per click) over the cheapest accommodation offers available for consumers.
Further, it was found that Trivago misled consumers through the use of strike through prices (that were in different colours and text) as Trivago often compared the rate for a standard room to that of a luxury room at the same hotel.
On 4 November 2020, the Full Federal Court upheld the rulings of Moshinsky J.
The matter will now return to the primary judge, who will consider the orders to be made against Trivago.
A copy of the judgment can be found here.
Please contact either Emma Davies on (02) 9777 81075 or me if you have any questions about misleading conduct, or if you require more detailed advice on this or any other matter.
Trivago, the travel price comparison website for hotels, failed to overturn The Federal Court’s first instance finding that they mislead Australian Consumers about cheap hotel deals on its website and in its television advertising campaigns that aired over 400,000 times between late 2013 and mid 2018.
Article
In January 2020, Moshinsky J held that Trivago had misled consumers by representing that its website would quickly and easily help users identify the cheapest rates available for a given hotel.
Specifically, it was found that Trivago did not sufficiently disclose to users that its website used an algorithm that gave prominence to accommodation providers paying Trivago a higher payment fee (cost per click) over the cheapest accommodation offers available for consumers.
Further, it was found that Trivago misled consumers through the use of strike through prices (that were in different colours and text) as Trivago often compared the rate for a standard room to that of a luxury room at the same hotel.
On 4 November 2020, the Full Federal Court upheld the rulings of Moshinsky J.
The matter will now return to the primary judge, who will consider the orders to be made against Trivago.
A copy of the judgment can be found here.
Please contact either Emma Davies on (02) 9777 81075 or me if you have any questions about misleading conduct, or if you require more detailed advice on this or any other matter.
Emma Davies John Graves
Senior Associate Principal
Bradfield & Scott Lawyers Bradfield & Scott Lawyers
Telephone: 9233 7299 Telephone: 9233 7299
Email: edavies@bradscott.com.au Email: jgraves@bradscott.com.au
Senior Associate Principal
Bradfield & Scott Lawyers Bradfield & Scott Lawyers
Telephone: 9233 7299 Telephone: 9233 7299
Email: edavies@bradscott.com.au Email: jgraves@bradscott.com.au
