Anyone who fails to disclose relevant facts in the course of business may be acting misleadingly, as the Cologne Higher Regional Court states in its decision. The question of when this is the case must be based on the significance of the undisclosed fact for the commercial decision and the suitability of the concealment to influence the consumer’s decision. The information that the module sold by a provider of permanent make-up does not have a safety membrane to prevent the backflow of liquids and impurities constitutes material information within the meaning of Section 5a para. 1 UWG. When deciding whether to purchase the supplier’s module, the relevant public will assume that the module sold has a safety membrane. If this information is not provided, the advertising company is acting misleadingly and must expect competitors to take action accordingly(OLG Cologne, judgment of March 22, 2019, Ref.: 6 U 193/18).
Inadmissible media disruption: advertising letter may not refer to general terms and conditions on the Internet
Inadmissible media disruption: advertising letters may not refer to general terms and conditions on the Internet – important decision by the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court.