Europäisches Justizportal - Rechtsprechung


Besuchen Sie die Betaversion des Europäischen Justizportals und lassen Sie uns wissen, was Sie darüber denken!



  • Home
  • Rechtsprechung

menu starting dummy link

Page navigation

menu starting dummy link


Nationale Kennung Supreme Court, Judgment 4 Ob 195/17f
Mitgliedstaat Österreich
Gebräuchliche Bezeichnung N/A
Art des Beschlusses Beschluss des Obersten Gerichts
Beschlussdatum 24/10/2017
Gericht Supreme Court
Schlagworte comparative advertising, top-level advertising, incorrect assertion.

Misleading and Comparative Advertising Directive, link


A media organisation that has reported about an event only a few hours earlier than anyone else, may not, without acting misleadingly and thus unfairly, claim to have reported about it "exclusively".

The complaining party is the media owner of the daily newspaper "Österreich". The defendant party is the media owner of the periodical "Kronen Zeitung". The parties in dispute are therefore in competition for readers and advertisers.

The defendant claimed to have reported exclusively about a concert of the Rolling Stones. In fact, it had reported that the Rolling Stones would perform in Austria in its morning edition, while another media organisation had released the information in the afternoon of the same day.

How should lead position advertising be evaluated and treated? What does "exclusive" mean in an advertisement?

Lead position advertising is a special case of comparative advertising and must be examined against the facts of para. 2 (1) (2) UWG. It can only be objected to under competition law if the alleged lead position does not correspond to objectively verifiable facts or if the announcement is otherwise likely to mislead the target public.

A report is exclusive if the information on which it is based is only available to the publishing medium, and the procurement of this information usually requires special journalistic research. "Exclusive" is, therefore, a synonym for “solely” and not for “early or similar interpretations”.

Volltext: Volltext

Keine Ergebnisse verfügbar

Keine Ergebnisse verfügbar

The Supreme Court dismisses the extraordinary appeal for review.