Opodo loses dispute over design of booking process

Consumers who book travel or flights via the Internet are regularly prompted to order additional services such as insurance. Furthermore, customers are often charged with additional service fees at the end of the ordering process. The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) had to decide on a booking process at opodo.de.

On the travel platform opodo.de, in 2013, the booking system for flights was designed in such a way that the booking of a flight could only be continued if the customer decided in favour of or against insurance by clicking on one of the listed options. If the customer rejected such insurance, a window opened in which Opodo warned of high cancellation fees and again drew attention to the available insurance. The customer then had to choose between two buttons. One of them was highlighted in orange and bore the inscription "Continue – I want to be insured", the other was not colour-highlighted and was labelled "Continue without insurance".

In a further booking step, the customer was prompted to select a payment method. When selecting a payment method other than the pre-selected one, the previously displayed flight price increased by an additional payment fee and a service charge.

The Federation of German Consumer Organisations and Consumer Associations (vzbv) considers the design of the booking process with regard to the selection of insurance benefits and the additional fee, which is only displayed upon selection of the payment method, to be anticompetitive and issued a warning to the Internet travel portal.

The Regional Court (LG) Berlin upheld the association's position (we reported). Opodo filed an appeal – but neither the appeal nor the appeal on points of law were successful.

The decision of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH)

The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) is also of the opinion that Opodo acted anticompetitively – Judgment of 29.09.2016 – Az. I ZR 160/15.

The Federal Court of Justice judges are of the opinion that the notification of the costs of the travel cancellation insurance in the challenged design of the booking process does not comply with the requirement of clarity, transparency and unambiguity. For if the booking process is designed in such a way that the consumer, who has previously deselected an additional service, is deceived about the continued need to deselect that service in the further course, then the consumer is not able to make a conscious and informed decision between several booking options.

Furthermore, a service charge that is waived for customers when booking a flight only when using a certain credit card must be included in the displayed final price. Otherwise, an effective price comparison for the consumer is not possible.

Conclusion

Consumers must be free to decide on travel insurance and must not be pressured to take it out. The stated final price of a flight must already include the additional costs charged for a particular payment method.