A hotel stay, whether for business or pleasure, rests on a fundamental agreement: the hotel contract (contrat d’hotellerie). Often concluded quickly, sometimes without even a formalised written document for a simple overnight stay, this contract nonetheless remains the cornerstone of the relationship between the operator and their guest. It gives rise to specific rights and obligations for each party. Understanding its sometimes debated legal nature, the stages of its formation – particularly in the age of online bookings – and the essential duties it imposes is indispensable for preventing misunderstandings and disputes.

What is the legal nature of this contract?

Legally classifying the hotel contract is not as straightforward as it might appear. Is it a standardised type of contract or a category in its own right? The law itself gives some clues, but also leaves room for interpretation.

It is not a deposit contract (contrat de depot) in the strict sense. Admittedly, Article 1952 of the French Civil Code states that the deposit of effects by the traveller at the hotel « must be regarded as a necessary deposit » (depot necessaire). However, this assimilation is primarily aimed at facilitating proof in the event of a problem (theft or damage). In practice, the hotelier does not generally have material and legal custody of all property that the guest brings into their room; the traveller retains control and use of it. The hotelier’s duty of supervision exists, but it does not transform the relationship into a pure deposit for every object present.

Nor is it a simple furnished rental. The fundamental difference lies in the bundle of services inseparable from the accommodation: housekeeping, provision of linen, the presence of a reception desk, and sometimes other services such as breakfast. It is this combination that makes hotels distinctive and distinguishes them from simply renting a furnished dwelling.

So how should it be classified? Legal scholars are divided. Some compare it to a contract for services (contrat d’entreprise), with the hotelier committing to provide a set of services for a price. Others consider it a sui generis contract – a unique contract with its own rules that does not fit perfectly into any pre-existing category. In practice, this classification debate has little direct impact on the hotelier or guest. What matters is knowing the specific legal regime that applies, particularly regarding liability and obligations.

This regime extends beyond « traditional » hotels. It may apply to other structures offering short-term accommodation with similar services, such as bed-and-breakfasts or certain holiday clubs. However, it does not apply to establishments that do not provide accommodation as their primary service (a simple restaurant, a campsite where one rents a bare pitch).

It is also important to recall that the hotel contract most often binds a professional (the operator) to a consumer (the guest). Consequently, the protective rules of the French Consumer Code (Code de la consommation) apply, adding an additional layer of obligations for the hotelier.

Formation of the contract: from online booking to arrival

The hotel contract is a consensual contract: it is formed as soon as there is agreement between the hotelier and the guest on the service (the room, the dates) and the price. This agreement may manifest in various ways: in person at reception, by telephone, by email, or, increasingly frequently, via a website (the hotel’s own or a booking platform).

Remote booking, particularly online, raises some specific points. When a guest pays a sum of money to guarantee their reservation, how is this sum classified? Is it a part-payment (acompte – a first instalment definitively committing both parties) or arrhes (a sum allowing each party to withdraw, the guest by forfeiting it, the hotelier by returning double)? Article L. 214-1 of the Consumer Code provides the answer: unless the contract explicitly states otherwise, sums paid in advance are considered as arrhes. This offers a degree of flexibility, but the conditions must be clear to the guest at the time of booking.

Another often overlooked point concerns the right of withdrawal. Normally, for contracts concluded at a distance (online, for example), the consumer has a 14-day period to change their mind without cost or justification. However, Article L. 221-28, 12 of the Consumer Code provides an important exception for « accommodation services […] provided on a specific date or period. » In practice, this means that for a hotel reservation for specific dates, the guest does not benefit from this 14-day right of withdrawal. Once the booking is confirmed, it is firm (subject to the cancellation conditions specific to the reservation, notably linked to the arrhes).

The rise of online booking platforms (Online Travel Agencies or OTAs such as Booking.com, Expedia, etc.) has also modified contractual relationships. Legally, the contract linking the hotelier to the OTA is generally classified as an agency contract (contrat de mandat) (Article L. 311-5-1 of the Tourism Code): the OTA acts in the name and on behalf of the hotelier to take the reservation.

These platforms long imposed « parity clauses » in their contracts with hotels. A distinction must be drawn:

  • Rate parity: This clause required the hotel not to offer on its own channels (website, telephone, reception) or via competing platforms a price lower than that offered on the OTA. French law (the « Macron Law » of 2015) prohibited these clauses. Article L. 311-5-1 of the Tourism Code guarantees the hotelier the freedom to grant the guest any discount or tariff advantage of any kind, directly. The hotelier may therefore offer a better rate on their official website. Note, however, that the Court of Justice of the European Union (judgment of 19 September 2024, Case C-264/23) recently held that these rate parity clauses (even restricted ones) could potentially infringe EU competition rules (Article 101 TFEU) if they restrict competition on the market. The analysis is thus becoming more complex at the European level, even though the French prohibition remains in force.
  • Availability and conditions parity: These clauses commit the hotel to offering the OTA conditions (cancellation, breakfast included, etc.) and a number of available rooms at least as favourable as on other channels. These types of clauses are not explicitly prohibited by French law and may therefore still feature in contracts between hotels and OTAs.

The guest’s obligations

While the hotelier has duties, the guest does too. The guest’s main obligation is, of course, to pay the agreed price for the room and any services consumed (breakfast, meals, telephone, etc.).

Beyond payment, the guest must use the room and hotel facilities reasonably. This implies complying with the house rules, not damaging equipment, and not causing nuisance to other guests (excessive noise, for example).

The hotelier may also ask the guest to prove their identity, and for foreign nationals, the law requires completion of an « individual police form » (fiche individuelle de police) (Article R. 611-42 of the Code of Entry and Residence of Foreigners).

What happens if the guest does not pay? The hotelier has standard debt recovery remedies: formal demand for payment, then potentially court proceedings (for example, a payment order or injonction de payer). It is important to note that the hotelier’s claim for payment is subject to a two-year limitation period from the end of the stay, pursuant to Article L. 218-2 of the Consumer Code.

Intentional non-payment can, in very specific cases, fall under criminal law. Article 313-5 of the Criminal Code penalises « bilking » (filouterie or grivelerie), which targets notably the act of having services provided (such as occupying a hotel room for up to 10 days) while knowing one is absolutely unable to pay or being determined not to pay. However, the conditions for application are strict (fraudulent intent, limited duration).

An important development should be highlighted: the hotelier has lost a specific tool they previously had to protect against unpaid bills. The « hotelier’s privilege » (privilege de l’hotelier) and the associated right of retention over the guest’s luggage were abolished by the ordinance reforming the law of security interests in 2021. The hotelier can therefore no longer legally retain a guest’s belongings for non-payment; they must use ordinary debt recovery procedures.

The hotelier’s fundamental obligations (excluding liability for damage)

In return for payment, the hotelier is bound by several essential obligations towards their guest, which go beyond simply making a room available.

One of the most visible is the obligation to provide price information. It is closely regulated by Article R. 311-12 of the Tourism Code and an implementing order (the most recent applicable being that of 18 December 2015). The hotelier must display clearly, legibly, and in an up-to-date manner:

  • Outside the establishment: the room rate for one night (or at minimum the minimum/maximum prices), as well as the prices of main services (breakfast, board, etc.).
  • At the guest reception point: the same information as that displayed outside.
  • In each room: the nightly rate for the room in question, as well as the prices of all ancillary services provided (telephone, minibar, room service, Wi-Fi if charged, etc.).

All displayed prices must be inclusive of all taxes (TTC). The objective is simple: to enable the guest to know the exact cost of their stay and services before committing or consuming.

The hotelier must also guarantee their guest quiet enjoyment (jouissance paisible) of the room let. This is an obligation of result: the hotelier must take the necessary measures to ensure the guest’s stay is not abnormally disturbed. This means protecting against excessive noise from other rooms or common areas (to the extent possible), but also against unjustified intrusions. The hotel room is considered a space falling within the guest’s private life during their stay. Entering without a legitimate reason (cleaning at scheduled times, emergency, guest’s request) could constitute a violation of domicile, criminally sanctioned under Article 226-4 of the Criminal Code.

Finally, as a professional dealing with consumers, the hotelier must comply with Consumer Code rules. This includes notably the prohibition on refusal of sale or provision of service without legitimate reason (Article L. 121-11). A hotelier cannot refuse to let an available room to a guest without valid reason (hotel full, previously unacceptable behaviour by the guest, safety risk, etc.). Discriminatory grounds are obviously prohibited. Similarly, the hotelier cannot engage in tied selling, meaning making the room rental conditional on the mandatory purchase of another service that could be sold separately (for example, imposing half-board or breakfast). The guest must remain free to choose which ancillary services they wish to consume.

If you have questions about the clauses of a hotel reservation contract or about your rights as a guest, our firm can provide clarification. For hotel industry professionals, expertise in commercial law is essential to secure their contractual practices.

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT