INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TOURISM, TRAVEL AND HOSPITALITY LAW The difference is even more noticeable if the comparison is between hotels in countries where the local currency is less strong than the euro; for example, in Argentina, the price proposed by the well - known chain can be four or even five times higher than that of the other companies. In essence, the higher fee is determined on the basis of a profiling constructed on the traveller's economic availability and the fact that he habitually accepts such a fee when he has to travel to Rome and, for his own peace of mind, wishes to avoid delays. This propensity cannot be taken into account every time the customer turns to the same chain in different contexts and in other countries. In this case, there is an unlawful use of data and presumptive proof is easy. Unlike in the case of air fares, where individual choices are conditioned by schedules, in the case of hotel bookings suppliers offer equivalent services at comparable rates, the determination of which cannot be altered on the basis of the consumer's assets. For those who wish to stay in a hotel, different accommodations are proposed; however, the relative charges cannot be too far apart, given the substantial homogeneity of the services. A significant deviation of the offers is the plausible result of an automated calculation system that unlawfully uses the data on the availability, acquired from previous and repeated telematic bookings, so that the price is based on what the customer is used to paying in a given situation. This is a commercial practice, as it is contrary to professional diligence56, within the meaning of Article 20(2) of the Italian Consumer Code; in fact, it is likely to distort the economic behaviour of consumers to an appreciable extent. At the same time, it is in breach of the EU Regulation No. 679 of 2016 and, in particular, of Article 5, since the data, collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes, must be processed in a correct and transparent manner, and cannot be used with a distorting effect. However, the pecuniary interest of the individual transaction is limited, since small economic differences are at issue and, as there is a disproportion between costs and benefits, judicial initiatives are not reasonable, also for the necessary containment of micro - conflicts. The reaction is up to the Competition and Market Authority in cases of violation of the Consumer Code or the Data Protection Authority for transgressions of the EU Regulation No. 679 of 201657. 56 See. Cons. Stato7 October 2022, n. 8614, in Giur.it. rep., 2022. Cf. L. Guffanti Pesenti, Scorrettezza delle pratiche commerciali e rapporto di consumo, Napoli, 2020, 151 ss.. 57 See Article 2 bis of Legislative Decree No. 196 of 2003, as amended by Legislative Decree No. 101 of 2018, on provisions for the adaptation of the national system to EU Regulation No. 679 of 2016.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==