Which party is typically at a disadvantage in an adhesion contract?

In an adhesion contract, the typical structure involves one party drafting the contract and presenting it to the other party on a "take it or leave it" basis, without much room for negotiation. This often places the less powerful party—who may have limited bargaining power—at a significant disadvantage.

The less powerful party often lacks the resources or influence to negotiate terms that may be more favorable or equitable to them. Since the contract is usually lengthy and complex, they may have to accept terms that they do not fully understand or appreciate, leading to a potentially unfair situation.

The economically powerful party is usually the one drafting the contract and thus has the advantage, while the party with equal negotiating power is less likely to be the target of an adhesion contract, as both parties would typically engage in negotiations. Similarly, the party with the most experience would be in a better position to understand and negotiate the contract terms, diminishing the risk of exploitation present for the less powerful party.