A US class action filed on 2 October alleges Expedia's parity clause and search rankings keep hotel prices high on every channel. Expedia calls the claims meritless.
Cover image: A hotel reception desk (file photo) — photo by Basile Morin, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
Three US travellers who did not book through Expedia have sued Seattle-based Expedia Group in US federal court, alleging its rate-parity rules inflate hotel prices on hotels’ own websites and rival booking sites, not only on Expedia. The proposed class action, Andrews et al. v. Expedia Group, Inc., was filed on 2 October and drew wider coverage from 13 to 18 October.
Expedia handles about 78% of US hotel bookings made through online travel agencies (OTAs) by value, the complaint alleges. It also alleges Expedia uses a contract clause and search-ranking algorithms to stop hotels undercutting its prices on any channel. The plaintiffs allege Sherman Act violations and seek treble damages and an injunction. Expedia calls the allegations “meritless”. No class has been certified.
What does the Expedia class action allege?
Lorraine Rocci of Pennsylvania booked directly with Hilton; Ronisha Andrews of California and Pak Seong Hoi of Washington state used Priceline. The complaint alleges all three still paid inflated rates.
The two proposed classes, running from 2 October 2022, cover US buyers who booked a “Listed Hotel” through the hotel’s own channels or through a non-Expedia OTA. Listed Hotels include Marriott, Hilton, IHG, Wyndham, Choice, Hyatt, Best Western and Accor brands, among others. Judge Lauren King has the case, 2:26-cv-03743.
How do hotel rate parity clauses work?
A parity, or most-favoured-nation (MFN), clause bars a hotel from pricing lower elsewhere than on the platform imposing it. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) calls a clause covering only the hotel’s own channels “narrow”, and one also covering third-party sites “wide”.
The complaint quotes Section C.1 of Expedia’s standard hotel agreement, which requires rates “equal to or better than those made available through your own Online Public booking or your own Online Public distribution channels”, unless the hotel is “located in Australia”.
The complaint alleges Expedia’s commission is about 15% of booking value. Direct bookings carry none, yet the clause bars even a 10% direct discount, it alleges. Chains use member rates to work around parity, as our analysis of direct-booking versus OTA economics explains.
The complaint says Expedia waived the clause for Australian hotels in March 2019 and kept listing them.
What are the “algorithmic” parity restraints?
The complaint also alleges that four Expedia tools penalise hotels that price lower on rival OTAs by cutting their search visibility: “rate competitiveness” and “Most Likely to Convert” ranking factors, an Automatic Rate Match tool and the VIP Access programme.
Lee Hepner of the American Economic Liberties Project told Straight Arrow News that Expedia uses search ranking “to enforce its most-favored-nations clause”.
| Measure | Figure | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Expedia share of US hotel-OTA bookings, by value | About 78% (elsewhere “nearly 80%” or “more than 70%”) | Complaint (alleged) |
| Booking.com share of the same market | 18% | Complaint (alleged) |
| Standard Expedia commission | About 15% | Complaint (alleged) |
| Commission for extra visibility | 25% to 30% | Complaint (alleged) |
| VIP Access average booking value vs non-participants | 42% higher | Complaint (alleged) |
| VIP Access key-customer prices off Expedia | 10% to 25% higher | Complaint (alleged) |
How has Europe dealt with parity clauses?
On 19 September 2024 the CJEU ruled in case C-264/23 that neither wide nor narrow parity clauses had been shown to be objectively necessary for a hotel platform, so they cannot in principle escape EU competition law as “ancillary restraints”.
The Digital Markets Act (DMA) goes further. A European Commission factsheet of 28 September 2026 says Booking.com, a designated “gatekeeper”, removed contractual parity from its European Economic Area terms in July 2024 and has had to comply since 14 November 2024. The ban covers “contractual or other measures having the same effect”, and Booking.com does not use external prices in its default ranking or partner-programme eligibility there.
Expedia is not a designated gatekeeper.
What does Expedia say, and what happens next?
An Expedia spokesperson told The Seattle Times the allegations were “meritless”, Asian Hospitality reported. The company said it has provided “competitive offerings and better value from travel suppliers” since 1996.
As of 19 October 2026, the CourtListener docket (last refreshed 12 October) listed no answer from Expedia.
Jonathan “Jack” Nicastro of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation disagreed with Hepner, telling Straight Arrow News that MFN clauses strengthen competition and putting Expedia’s share of all US hotel bookings at 23%. Booking Holdings separately faces a US Federal Trade Commission investigation over online ads, as our report on Booking’s Vayo AI agent noted.
Frequently asked questions
Can travellers who never used Expedia be part of the Expedia class action?
Potentially. The proposed classes cover US buyers who, since 2 October 2022, booked a Listed Hotel directly or through a non-Expedia OTA such as Priceline. No class has been certified, so the court must first decide whether the case proceeds as a class action.
Has a court found that Expedia broke antitrust law?
No. The claims, which Expedia calls “meritless”, are allegations in a complaint filed on 2 October 2026 in the US District Court for the Western District of Washington. The CourtListener docket, last updated on 12 October, showed no answer from Expedia and no ruling.
What is a rate parity clause?
A contract term that stops a hotel offering better prices elsewhere than on the platform imposing it. A narrow clause covers the hotel’s own channels; a wide clause also covers rival booking sites. The Expedia complaint alleges ranking tools extend parity to every channel.
Does the Expedia lawsuit affect hotels outside the United States?
Not directly. The proposed classes cover US buyers of US hotel stays, and the quoted clause excludes Australian hotels. In the European Economic Area, the Digital Markets Act has barred Booking.com from parity requirements since 14 November 2024, but Expedia is not a designated gatekeeper.
Sources
- US District Court, Andrews v. Expedia Group complaint
- CourtListener, Andrews v. Expedia Group docket
- Asian Hospitality, Expedia sued over hotel rates
- Straight Arrow News, Lawsuit claims Expedia is a monopoly
- CJEU, Press release on price parity clauses
- European Commission, DMA Booking.com factsheet
- European Commission, DMA gatekeepers
