hoshikarakitaridia , 5 hours ago

Let’s break those contract down: contracts are enforceable. Unless, they interfere with other rights you have and those take priority. How? Well there’s things like conscionability and consideration.

Consideration means, both parties have to get something in return. It can literally be a corn of rice, but it has to be something.

Conscionability means there’s things too egregious to be enforceable through contract law.

For example I can’t sign a contract that I want to be killed by someone else. It gets very complicated, but in it’s most basic form, it is unconscionable to just chalk a death up to freedom, just because you found a contract of the victim stating they want to be killed. The investigation takes priority and a prosecution’s case could be brought in spite of any contract. This render such a contract void.

So what does this fall under? Well there’s a lot of rights that people that rent a property have and that they can enforce against them against the landlords. Some of those rights pierce the veil of the contract and therefore are enforceable in spite of the contract.

Now I am not sure about the rights in this particular situation but there is a solid chance this creates a legal claim against the hotel company.

My point is, both of you are right, but you are getting down voted right now because you are ignoring the the fact that contract law, although very broad, is not absolute, and especially in this case it might be unenforceable.

Obligatory IANAL.