Booking.com Not Liable for Dirty Villa, Israeli Court Rules
Translated & summarized from N12 by baba
An Israeli traveler who found a villa in Greece to be dirty and infested with insects was denied compensation by the Haifa District Court. The court overturned a lower court's ruling, stating that Booking.com, as a platform, is not responsible for property defects. The judge ruled that such issues are the responsibility of the property owner and not the booking site. The traveler must now return the 5,300 shekel award she received.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Booking.com is not liable for a dirty Greek villa, an Israeli court ruled, overturning a lower decision.
- The Haifa District Court stated property defects are the owner's responsibility, not the booking platform's.
- A traveler was denied 5,300 shekels after leaving a villa due to insects and poor conditions.
- The court found the issues were unexpected and not within Booking.com's control.
- The traveler did not allow the owner or Booking.com a chance to fix the problems.
An Israeli traveler who left a dirty villa in Greece after just ten minutes was denied compensation by an Israeli district court, overturning a lower court's decision. The traveler, Irit Ziv, had booked the villa through the Booking.com app on June 16, 2025, expecting a clean and well-equipped property. However, upon arrival, she found the villa to be infested with insects, ants, and spiders, with worn-out furniture, a faulty air conditioner, and no internet. Ziv and her family immediately left, incurring double the cost for alternative accommodation.
Initially, a small claims court in Kiryat ruled in Ziv's favor, ordering Booking.com to pay her 5,300 shekels (approximately $1,400 USD) for the booking and emotional distress, rejecting Booking.com's claim that it was merely an intermediary. Booking.com appealed this decision to the Haifa District Court.
District Court Judge Idit Weinberger accepted the appeal, stating that while she did not doubt Ziv's credibility, the law was misapplied. The judge clarified that Booking.com's terms of use position it as a platform operator, not a party to the contract between the guest and the property owner. She described Booking.com as a "pipeline or brokerage model." The court found that the reported issues, such as dirt and malfunctioning internet, were unexpected and not within Booking.com's control, emphasizing that the platform cannot constantly monitor the condition of thousands of properties.
Furthermore, the judge noted that Ziv did not give the property owner or Booking.com a chance to rectify the problems before leaving. The court concluded that the issues did not constitute a fundamental breach of contract and that Ziv took a "calculated risk" regarding potential non-reimbursement. The original small claims court ruling was canceled, and Ziv will have to return the awarded sum to Booking.com with interest and linkage if already paid.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Coverage from N12
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.
