"By mistake": Hotel replaced 10 of 17 wedding dishes, court orders compensation
A Chinese couple who paid in advance for a premium wedding catering package discovered after the event that they had received a cheaper menu due to staff error. The court ruled this a breach of contract and ordered the hotel to provide compensation.
A Chinese couple who discovered that the dishes served at their wedding were not those they had ordered and paid for has won a legal battle. The court in Wuhu, Anhui province, upheld a ruling requiring the hotel to return approximately 1,500 dollars to the couple for the price difference and to pay an additional 417 dollars as compensation for emotional distress.
The couple had ordered the hotel's "A" package for the wedding reception—the more expensive option—and paid the full amount in advance. Only after the event did it emerge that the hotel had actually provided the "B" package, the cheaper one, due to staff errors. Family members and friends were the first to notice the discrepancy and alerted the bride and groom at the end of the meal that some dishes did not meet the agreed standard.
Upon conducting a review, the couple discovered that 10 out of 17 main dishes had been replaced. For example, "salmon in green onion oil in Cantonese style" was replaced with "steamed turbot," and "steamed abalone with garlic and vermicelli" was replaced with "steamed scallops with garlic."
After negotiations with the hotel failed, the couple filed a lawsuit demanding a refund of 3,750 dollars for the price difference, a double refund of the deposit, and 417 dollars in compensation for emotional distress. The hotel admitted the mistakes and attributed them to staff negligence, but argued there was no intention to deceive, that the event was conducted properly, and that the demand for compensation for emotional damage lacked factual and legal basis.
The court rejected these arguments. The judges determined that the hotel had unilaterally lowered the quality of the banquet without obtaining the customers' consent and had failed to fulfill its contractual obligations in full. In the first instance, the refund was calculated at 56 dollars per table, and 417 dollars were awarded for emotional suffering. The appellate court upheld the result and left the compensation order in place.
