When an Austrian hotel can offer better terms on its own website, what section 1a(4) UWG covers, how to assess a platform demand and which records to keep.
Mag. Bernhard Brandauer, Austrian attorney-at-law
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte
Mag. Bernhard Brandauer assists with the legal assessment of tourism contracts, operating issues, levies and liability matters.
An Austrian hotel can set rates and booking terms for its own website. If a booking platform requires the hotel to avoid offering a lower price or better terms through other channels, including its own website, section 1a(4) read with Annex item 32 of the Unfair Competition Act (UWG) is relevant. Preserve the exact wording, affected channels and platform message before deciding how to respond.
The statutory rule addresses a demand by the platform towards the accommodation business. It has applied since 2016 and expressly covers earlier contracts. That helps assess a current message, while leaving other platform-contract questions and changes in visibility to separate review.
The topic page Accommodation and hotel guest stays covers the broader contract between a business and its guests. This article focuses on a hotel’s own pricing when a platform makes a specific parity demand.
Choose the situation closest to the contract or message. This check identifies records to preserve for an initial review.
Start with the platform wording and the sales channels it refers to.
Save the complete contract version and the message in which the platform demands the rule. Mark whether it would bar lower prices or other better terms on the hotel website and on other channels. Assess the exact wording against section 1a(4) and Annex item 32 UWG.
Document the basis for any rate or account change until the remaining contract effects have been reviewed.
Save the current and changed display with the date, search, stay period and affected rate. Ask the platform to identify in writing the term or condition behind the change. A change in placement alone does not establish a demand covered by the price-parity rule.
First establish whether the platform bars a better direct booking or is applying a commission, fee or price difference. Save the current contract, statement and relevant price displays. A difference in commission does not by itself trigger the price-parity rule.
Section 1a(4) UWG refers to the practice described in Annex item 32. It concerns a booking-platform operator demanding that an accommodation business refrain from offering lower prices or other better terms through further distribution channels. The hotel website is expressly included. Section 1a(4) UWG treats this practice as aggressive in any event.
Section 1a(4) also states that agreements relating to the practice in item 32 are absolutely void. A hotel should therefore distinguish a genuine parity demand from other terms in the contract. The provision does not set a general rule for commissions, technical visibility or booking administration.
The statutory test concerns a specific connection: a platform asks the accommodation business to restrict lower prices or better terms on other sales channels. Annex item 32 UWG expressly includes the hotel website.
The price-parity rule was introduced by BGBl I No. 99/2016. Under section 44(10) UWG, section 1a(4) and Annex item 32 took effect one month after promulgation. The same transitional rule expressly applies them to contracts concluded before that date. An earlier signing date therefore does not rule out a review.
Section 44(16) UWG sets different effective dates for further amendments made by BGBl I No. 58/2026. The provisions and Annex items taking effect on 27 September 2026 include neither section 1a(4) nor Annex item 32. The price-parity rule was therefore not first introduced in 2026.
For an existing agreement, review the full timeline. The signing date, later amendments, revised platform terms and the current message may each matter. The transitional provision addresses the application of the parity rule; it does not automatically resolve every question about a later change to the contractual relationship.
Read the clause and the related message in full. Identify who sent it, what the platform wants the hotel to do, which channels are covered and which term must not be more favourable. A general notice about placement, technical display or platform fees needs to be assessed against its exact wording.
Then compare the price and booking terms for the same stay, room and rate. A lower website price and a different platform total may reflect different services, availability, payment options or cancellation terms. Show those features in the comparison so the difference is not prematurely labelled a parity demand.
A change in ranking or visibility can matter commercially to a hotel. On its own, it does not prove that the platform demanded lower direct prices or better terms be withheld. Ask for the contractual basis and save the display before drawing a legal conclusion from timing alone.
A hotel can calculate direct rates by room, season, occupancy and distribution cost. Breakfast, flexible cancellation, advance payment or additional services may also distinguish booking offers. The parity rule addresses the specified demand for the same or less favourable prices and terms on other channels. It does not replace a review of the rest of the agreement.
Guests need to understand the rate and its conditions. Describe the services, payment terms and cancellation rules included in a lower direct offer. Whether mandatory fees appear correctly during booking is a separate price-display issue and should be documented separately from the parity demand.
Check the technical presentation too. Rates, availability and booking rules may appear in different places on the hotel website and platform. Record which offer a guest could actually select and which terms appeared before a binding booking.
Ask the platform to identify its demand in writing. Which contract term does it rely on? Which channels and price components are covered? Is it asking the hotel to make a specific change, or describing how an offer is displayed? A focused question creates a common factual basis.
If the platform presents a new contract or amendment, compare it with the version previously in force. Mark changes concerning the hotel website, other channels and better booking terms. The hotel should understand the scope and effects before signing or accepting the new terms online.
The express nullity stated in section 1a(4) matters for an agreement about the specified parity practice. It does not support a blanket conclusion about every commission, account suspension, termination or other contractual consequence. If the platform threatens a measure, review the notice and the full agreement before making a significant change in response.
Save the platform terms that applied when the contract was signed, then add each later version. Keep emails, partner-account messages, notes of calls and any stated dates together. A short timeline can show when the hotel offered a lower direct rate and when the platform responded.
Capture the hotel website and platform display for the same stay, number of guests, room and rate. Keep the booking steps, payment method, cancellation terms, included services and any fees. If the platform referred to ranking or visibility, also record the search, time and displayed position.
File statements and commission records separately. That makes it easier to tell whether the issue concerns a parity term, a price difference or an accounting question. A clear contract version, the specific demand and a comparable set of offers usually provide a useful starting point for the next review.
Key point: Section 1a(4) read with Annex item 32 UWG covers a platform demand barring lower prices or better terms through other channels, including the hotel website. The rule also applies to older contracts. Check the exact wording, keep parity separate from commission and visibility, and preserve the relevant booking displays.
Briefly describe the business, location, parties and issue. We will discuss which documents and next review step may be useful.
Address
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg
Phone
+43 662 6280000