A booking request became a discrimination case
The woman wanted to book a health-related holiday and explained that her dog provided essential assistance. The hotel would allow dogs in bedrooms and the lobby, but excluded them from other guest areas. The court found that the apparently neutral rule particularly disadvantaged people who relied on assistance dogs. [1][2]
Hygiene arguments did not justify the ban
The court examined expert evidence and rejected the hotel’s general hygiene justification. It also considered less restrictive arrangements, such as separating an assistance dog from a person with a serious allergy in space or time. Its reasoning focused on the restrictions in this case, including the refusal at the booking stage. [1]
An association helped bring the challenge
The association Freunde der Assistenzhunde Europas supported the case. Its chair Gloria Petrovics said: “Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case.” Austria’s federal disability legislation distinguishes trained assistance dogs, including guide, service and signal dogs. The case highlighted their role in enabling access to ordinary services and leisure activities. [2][3]