Key Aspects:
- A German couple is suing AIDA Cruises over the loss of a nudist area onboard AIDAdiva that impacted their world cruise sailing.
- The ship was renovated between when the couple booked the cruise and when the voyage set sail in November 2025.
- Whether or not the nudist area was a key feature in advertising may be the key to the lawsuit and any possible refund.
Every experienced cruise guest is familiar with the changing nature of cruise travel, from dining menu updates to shifts in onboard activities to changes of venues and experiences as ships are renovated.
It doesn’t get much more experienced than a 128-day world cruise, but while the itinerary was spectacular, the ship itself wasn’t what one couple had hoped for.
According to Bild, two German residents, Sabine Hartmann and Michael B., booked AIDAdiva‘s world cruise in February 2024. By November 2025, when the voyage set sail, however, they found a dramatic change onboard.
The nudist area was dramatically reduced following the ship’s refurbishment from February 3 to March 22, 2025. Among the other renovations were redesigned seating in the main show lounge, reconfigurations to select staterooms, new dining venues added, and renovation of the wellness complex and the kids club.
What used to be an extensive nudist area on Deck 14 had been transformed into the new Sky Deck, which the cruise line describes as an “exclusive outdoor area for guests of our suites, offering wonderful panoramic views. Two whirlpools, cozy cabanas, sun loungers and lounge chairs ensure a pure holiday feeling.”
The new Sky Deck area does not appear to permit nudity, and what’s more, no longer offers public access for all of AIDAdiva‘s 2,050 guests.
At the time the couple booked the world cruise at a cost of roughly €70,000 (approximately $79,600 USD), published deck plans confirmed the larger nudist area and there was no indication that it would be removed before the voyage.
There is still a nudist area onboard, albeit in a different location and without as many amenities. The couple also claims the new space is not completely private.
“The previously spacious nudist area has been completely eliminated. The newly created nudist cubicle isn’t suitable for a genuine nudist experience,” said B.

So frustrated with the change, B. contacted the cruise line during the voyage about permitting everyone to use the Sky Deck. That was denied, and the case is now in court as the couple seeks a 22% refund for what they feel are dramatic changes to the onboard experience.
To be clear, there were no substantive changes to the ship’s world cruise itinerary. The voyage departed from Hamburg, Germany on November 10, 2025 and included visits to four continents, 28 countries, and 53 ports before returning to Germany in May.
Are Public Spaces Guaranteed?
Could this be a case of false or fraudulent advertising? On one hand, at the time of booking, the nudist area was available but may not have been highlighted or advertised on the cruise line’s website. If that is the case, it would not be considered a significant aspect of the vacation experience.
If, however, the nudist area was highlighted as a specific feature but was subsequently removed, travelers may be entitled to a partial refund related to false advertising or adjusted expectations after booking.
While AIDA Cruises has not commented on the lawsuit, the situation is similar to the frustration cruisers have over closed waterslides onboard Royal Caribbean’s Icon class ships.
Cruise Hive has previously reported on the extensive waterslide closures that have continued for months. Because both Icon of the Seas and Star of the Seas are advertised as having the largest waterparks at sea, guests are understandably upset when they pay a premium for the new ships but aren’t able to enjoy the slides.
Yet other public areas can and are frequently changed, updated, or removed and guests have no recourse for how such changes may impact their cruise vacations.
Carnival Cruise Line, for example, has been removing libraries from its ships during dry dock updates for several years. The small quiet spaces are not heavily advertised or promoted, however, and therefore would not be a basis for any false advertising lawsuit.


