Willingness to participate in dispute resolution proceedings “in individual cases” is anti-competitive

The provision of Section 36 (1) No. 2 VSBG only requires information about the competent consumer arbitration board from a trader who has undertaken to participate in a dispute resolution procedure or is obliged to do so by law. In contrast, a trader who has merely agreed to participate in a dispute resolution procedure is exempt from providing this information.

The trader’s obligation to participate required under Section 36 (1) No. 2 VSBG for the obligation to provide information to arise is not triggered by the trader’s notification under Section 36 (1) No. 1 VSBG that it is prepared to participate in a dispute resolution procedure before a consumer arbitration board.

This also applies if the trader’s notification regarding the scope of its willingness to participate (“generally willing to participate in a dispute resolution procedure”) is unclear. This is because it cannot be concluded from such an unclear declaration of willingness that the trader is entering into or has entered into an obligation to participate within the meaning of Section 36 (1) No. 2 VSBG (BGH, decision of August 21, 2019, case no. VIII ZR 263/18).

Free newsletter

Current decisions and practical guidance on trade mark, copyright, media and competition law in Germany and the EU. Concise, by email.

Double opt-in. You can unsubscribe at any time using the link in every email.

Contact person

Picture of Dennis Tölle

Dennis Tölle

Specialist Attorney for Copyright and Media Law; Specialist Attorney for Intellectual Property Law

Free newsletter

Kostenloser Newsletter

Aktuelle Urteile, Praxistipps und neue Folgen aus Marken-, Urheber-, Medien- und Wettbewerbsrecht. Kompakt per E-Mail.

Double-Opt-in. Abmeldung jederzeit über den Link in jeder E-Mail.

Search

Request