The European Court of Justice (ECJ) In its ruling of September 26, 2024, made important clarifications on advertising with price reductions, which significantly strengthen consumer protection in the European Union. The judgment particularly affects the Price information for discount campaigns and sets clear requirements for the transparency of this information Article 6a of Directive 98/6/EC.
Facts
In the present case, the Baden-Württemberg consumer advice center against the Aldi Süd Services SE & Co. OHG sued because it stated misleading price reductions in its advertising. For example, one campaign stated a reduction from a previous price that did not accurately represent the lowest price in the last 30 days. Specifically, it was about bananas and pineapples, for which a reduced price of 1.29 euros was given, even though a different, lower price had already applied in the last 30 days.
Image from the ECJ decision, left on bananas, right on pineapples
Legal basis and analysis
The ECJ dealt intensively with this in its ruling Directive 98/6/ECin particular Article 6awhich took place in 2019 as part of the Directive 2019/2161 was introduced. This article states that Price reductions in advertising on the lowest price must be based on the trader within the last 30 Take used before the price reduction. The aim of this regulation is to Fake discounts To prevent retailers from artificially increasing prices in order to then advertise a supposedly large price reduction.
Prohibition of misleading people through incorrect price information
The ECJ made it clear that it is not enough to indicate any previous price in advertising. The lowest price in the last 30 days must correspond to the calculation basis of the advertised discount. This means that any discount provided must be based on a real price charged within the last 30 days. The ECJ emphasized that a deviation from this regulation would mislead consumers.
Uniformity in the internal market
The Court also pointed out that the Consumer information must be consistent and transparent throughout the internal market. The Directive aims to ensure that consumers can make informed decisions by clear and transparent pricing information receive. This requires that the price information is unambiguous and easy to read. Any discrepancy or manipulation in pricing would distort competition and undermine consumer protection.
This decision expands existing case law, particularly in the area of misleading advertisingwhich was already influenced by previous judgments in Germany.
Historical case law on advertising with discounts
In the past, German courts have dealt with questions on several occasions Advertising and discounts. A striking example is a case of OLG Hamm from 2010, which dealt with misleading online advertising for condoms. In this case, it was advertised that 100 condoms were available starting at €3.95, but it later emerged that the offer was limited to one pack per order. The court examined the Relevance of misleading and concluded that only those consumers who actually wanted to order more than one pack, which represented a minority, were affected. There was none essential deception determined.
Another judgment of the Regional court food was engaged in advertising for dentists. It was emphasized here that inadmissible Price comparisons and unclear price promises are inadmissible if they are not based on a real basis for comparison. For example, a price promise “significantly cheaper than on the Internet” was viewed as inadmissible without appropriate proof.
Context of the ECJ decision 2024
In contrast to these earlier decisions, the ECJ In its judgment of 2024, it went one step further and specified the requirements for Price advertising Europe-wide. According to Article 6a of the Directive 98/6/EC When specifying discounts, retailers must always do so lowest price in the last 30 days use as a basis. This is to ensure that Fake discountswhich are disguised by short-term price increases, can be avoided.
The ECJ decision aims to ensure clear transparency in advertising to protect consumers from misleading discounts. While previous cases such as the judgment of the Hamm Higher Regional Court or the Essen Regional Court focused on the Misleading due to inconsistent or incomplete information, the ECJ is now laying down one clear legal standard which is binding for all member states. This harmonization strengthens the Consumer protection and sets clear limits for advertising measures with discounts.
Impact and conclusion
This ruling represents an important step towards one stronger consumer protection The ECJ has made it clear that Price discounts only based on the lowest price in the last 30 days may take place. This means that Dealers do not artificially increase prices to display misleading discounts. For companies, this means that they can… Pricing strategies must check closely to ensure that their discounts comply with legal requirements.
The ECJ decision from 2024 expands the previous case law Discounts and price reductions considerably. It brings more clarity and stricter requirements for traders, especially in relation to the Indication of price reductions.
Last articles by lawyer Jens Ferner (specialist lawyer for IT & criminal law) (Show all)
