French term (edited): non-opposable - in this context

as opposed to tentative - i.e. simple, clear procedures for making firm bookings

just a suggestion

French term (edited): non-opposable - in this context

Looks to me that the contracting or third parties may not challenge the validity of the booking. I frequently come across this term in legal texts.
Thanks

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2006-08-07 18:13:54 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Barbara,
I am awfully sorry for the inadvertant response that I sent you below. I did not read the entire statment by Brouth who seem to make negative comments about your name. I just thought you meant to talk to me. Please accept my sincere apology.
Best

French term (edited): non-opposable - in this context

Maybe it's an awkward way of saying that reservations are binding on the centre but not on guests. IOW, if I book a week there, they must have room for me when I get there, but if I ring and cancel, they accept my cancellation (without penalty?).

I think that this interpretation of "free and easy" goes with the sense of "simple" and "clair" (even if their text itself is not THAT clear!). Contrary to what BF (what unfortunate initials!!) suggests, "non-opposable" would therefore mean that bookings ARE reversible (can be cancelled by guests).

Of course this somehow assumes that the French is doubly poorly written and that it is the "réservation(s)" that are "non opposables", not the "modalités".

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 23 hrs (2006-08-08 15:37:13 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Since I appear to have the ability to restore this answer which was deleted, and this is the easiest way I see to make a public apology, I am doing so.

Barbara: since you appear to be British rather than American and intelligent to boot, I did not for a moment think you would be so touchy, and I therefore apologize unreservedly for upsetting you. I shall tread extra warily with you in future since your sense of humour does not appear to coincide with mine.

Re. making fun of my name, it's Alex Greenland. Be warned though: I've been quite used to references to eskimos and abominable snowmen since the age of 8 when a teacher calling the class roll called me "Abominable snowman" and a girl by the name of Oberg "iceberg". It wouldn't be allowed these days, would it! Just how inventive can you be? MY parents deliberately called me Alexander James rather than the reverse to prevent people thinking I was a car ...

Re. whether I mean binding or non binding, I think a glance at the Term Search function will come up with the definition of "opposable" I am basing my answer on. But for the sake of what is probably repetition, here is a definition of "opposabilité" from the Dalloz Termes juridiques:

opposabilité - Rayonnement d'un acte ou d'un jugement à l'égard de ceux qui n'ont été ni parties ni représentés : ainsi chaque locataire d'un immeuble doit respecter la situation des autres locataires ...

i.e. the rules previous occupants may have decided upon are binding upon (opposables aux) subsequent occupants (unless the majority decides to change the rules).

Thus "opposable" does NOT mean that something is "opposable", i.e. can be contested, and is therefore not binding, but quite the reverse: that a law, contract, or regulation can be "apposed" (with an A) or applied to a person.

As an example with only two parties, a contract whose terms are deemed by a court to be abusive will be "non opposable" (not binding) in respect of the party so abused.