酒店价格平价的法律方面

IF 3.6 3区 管理学 Q1 ECONOMICS
G. Bianchi, Yong Chen
{"title":"酒店价格平价的法律方面","authors":"G. Bianchi, Yong Chen","doi":"10.1177/13548166231190142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research note delineates the conflict of hotel rate parity and key clauses of competition laws in both Europe and the U.S. We trace the origin of hotel rate parity to the principle of most favored nation (MFN) in international trade agreements. We show that rate parity challenges two pillars of competition law. Under rate parity agreements, it is travel intermediaries—not hotels—that demand rate parity, which comes down to the dominance of travel intermediaries over small and independent hotels. The courts view MFN status as a hindrance to competition and therefore in violation of competition law. The trend and message in Europe are clear: the clause is most likely to be judged as not complying with EU competition law and its national equivalents. In the U.S. though, a lack of case decisions precludes us from reaching any conclusion about the fate of the MFN clause.","PeriodicalId":23204,"journal":{"name":"Tourism Economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The legal aspects of hotel rate parity\",\"authors\":\"G. Bianchi, Yong Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13548166231190142\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research note delineates the conflict of hotel rate parity and key clauses of competition laws in both Europe and the U.S. We trace the origin of hotel rate parity to the principle of most favored nation (MFN) in international trade agreements. We show that rate parity challenges two pillars of competition law. Under rate parity agreements, it is travel intermediaries—not hotels—that demand rate parity, which comes down to the dominance of travel intermediaries over small and independent hotels. The courts view MFN status as a hindrance to competition and therefore in violation of competition law. The trend and message in Europe are clear: the clause is most likely to be judged as not complying with EU competition law and its national equivalents. In the U.S. though, a lack of case decisions precludes us from reaching any conclusion about the fate of the MFN clause.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23204,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tourism Economics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tourism Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166231190142\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tourism Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166231190142","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究报告描述了欧洲和美国酒店价格平价与竞争法关键条款的冲突。我们将酒店价格平价的起源追溯到国际贸易协议中的最惠国原则。我们表明,利率平价挑战了竞争法的两大支柱。根据价格平价协议,需求价格平价的是旅行中介机构,而不是酒店,这归结为旅行中介机构对小型独立酒店的主导地位。法院认为最惠国待遇妨碍竞争,因此违反了竞争法。欧洲的趋势和信息是明确的:该条款最有可能被判断为不符合欧盟竞争法及其国家对等法律。然而,在美国,由于缺乏案件裁决,我们无法就最惠国待遇条款的命运得出任何结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The legal aspects of hotel rate parity
This research note delineates the conflict of hotel rate parity and key clauses of competition laws in both Europe and the U.S. We trace the origin of hotel rate parity to the principle of most favored nation (MFN) in international trade agreements. We show that rate parity challenges two pillars of competition law. Under rate parity agreements, it is travel intermediaries—not hotels—that demand rate parity, which comes down to the dominance of travel intermediaries over small and independent hotels. The courts view MFN status as a hindrance to competition and therefore in violation of competition law. The trend and message in Europe are clear: the clause is most likely to be judged as not complying with EU competition law and its national equivalents. In the U.S. though, a lack of case decisions precludes us from reaching any conclusion about the fate of the MFN clause.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Tourism Economics
Tourism Economics Multiple-
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
11.40%
发文量
90
期刊介绍: Tourism Economics, published quarterly, covers the business aspects of tourism in the wider context. It takes account of constraints on development, such as social and community interests and the sustainable use of tourism and recreation resources, and inputs into the production process. The definition of tourism used includes tourist trips taken for all purposes, embracing both stay and day visitors. Articles address the components of the tourism product (accommodation; restaurants; merchandizing; attractions; transport; entertainment; tourist activities); and the economic organization of tourism at micro and macro levels (market structure; role of public/private sectors; community interests; strategic planning; marketing; finance; economic development).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信