The court ruled that the omission of the information regarding the trader does not impact the transactional decision of the consumer, as the key elements in the advertisement (the offered service and the price) were indicated.
The administrative authority is obliged to motivate why the omitted information is considered essential and necessary for the average consumer to take a transactional decision. According to the court, the mere fact that information relating to the trader is omitted, is insufficient to prove the existence of a misleading commercial practice.
Omission of a trader's name in an advertisement does not constitute an unfair commercial practice. It is inconceivable that a trader should be explicitly referred to in each advertisement.